Is anyone else bored by current pop music?

Michael is exceptional, very few child singers if any ever displayed that kind of mind blowing emotive ability while having also the control, diction and just natural quality that Michael had. But most children who are truly gifted display that talent at a young age. If you've ever seen clips of Christina Aguilera or Celine Dion or Billy Gilman as children, they were very impressive. Obviously not as polished as they became, but they were still extremely good, while medicore talents like Britney Spears or Justin Timberlake displayed that medicority at a young age. You can become decent through practice, but never great or even good if it isn't there to begin with.
 
Uh--then again not everyone is singing in a family band when they are 5 years old with their father whipping their a**es for them to get it right or else.

You don't have to have been Michael Jackson when you were five years old to turn out a great vocalist. Not by any means.

...And too bad those clowns who were booing Lauryn Hill @ the Apollo had no clue what a superstar she'd turn out to be someday ( & I'm sure some of those same people bought her & the fugees's albums later on) .

Who's laughing now? :)
you must have missed where i said "he's a very special case and each talent is an individual" in your quoting. no need to be condescending.
 
Um, I thought she was really very good there. lol I mean you can tell she's nervous, but I can hear the talent immediately. And I'm afraid that of you're posting this vid for argument as an example of a mediocre performance, well, what can I say. Surely not her greatest, but still, obvious to me she has talent. If you could not have predicted this woman's success, then how can anyone, including record exec.s?
lol, record execs didn't - it was Wyclef Jean that exposed her because she was Pras' close friend and the rest is history. my point is that to fully realise a talent's potential, you'd need to give them an opportunity to groom them into their max capabilities.

I will say this; exec.'s probably go the route with the least risk involved. And I guess that's to be expected. Who is willing to invest in high risk ventures? Not many of us.
that's exactly what i've been saying - they don't take risks to search for and invest in new creative talents and just stick to "proven" formulas. big labels, that is.
 
Last edited:
So to recap, this was my original post.
I have to say though, that MJ put the bar so high that it must be tough on today's artists to come up with something new and decent. Maybe that's why we see so many 'copiers'...

To which you replied this.
they're there but don't get the chance to be noticed.

the Michael formula seems to work only for Michael; it's time for major labels to take risks with new unique and creative ventures that have been there since the 'decline' of great mainstream music.
Now, I understood that you meant that there are artists out there who are capable of reaching that bar. I maintain that there are not. We've been spoiled by MJ. No one has the amount of talent he has, in as many areas as he has. No one is capable of reaching that bar. They all seem pale by comparison. Yes, there may be a few artists who haven't had their talent recognized by major labels, but if there was some talent out there that came remotely close to MJ's, we would know.

And by saying this-
I will say this; exec.'s probably go the route with the least risk involved. And I guess that's to be expected. Who is willing to invest in high risk ventures? Not many of us.
I was (obviously, I thought,) agreeing with you on this. Maybe I should have said; 'I'll give you this' instead of 'I will say this.'



lol, record execs didn't - it was Wyclef Jean that exposed her because she was Pras' close friend and the rest is history. my point is that to fully realise a talent's potential, you'd need to give them an opportunity to groom them into their max capabilities.

that's exactly what i've been saying - they don't take risks to search for and invest in new creative talents and just stick to "proven" formulas. big labels, that is.
But the main point of there not being talent such as MJ's still stands. So yes, there may be a handful of artists out there that may be able to provide something slightly better than today's pop music, but I maintain that the number is not all that high, and in no way can compare or even come close to MJ.

I really think peeps are out of ideas. MJ's done it all so well, and there hasn't been anything revolutionary in music in decades (imo). It sounds like you may have some unrecognized, talented artists in mind that we don't know about. Have you anyone in mind?
 
Last edited:
well i never claimed we had a talent like Michael. i actually said "i'm not saying we have a Michael-esque talent that has been lying dormant somewhere".

my point was to counter your notion that we "lack artists who can come up with something new and decent". they're in fact there (and always have been) if you look outside of the current mainstream. we had the neo-soul bloom back in around 1995 with the likes of D'Angelo and Erykah Badu and that went largely unnoticed until Lauryn Hill came in with her solo album. somewhere along the line, this went right downhill throughout the new millennium and it in fact progressed while underground and we still have genius artists like Dwele and Meshell Ndegeocello who are (and have been) indecently ignored by big record labels. this is just one example of where there is still creativity and a source of something new to be exploited with the aid of big labels - and i'm sure there are other genres in the same position.

like we agreed on, it seems to be the cowardly attitudes of business-orientated labels that are largely at fault for the lack of creativity in the game. and of course Michael raised the bar, who can argue with that!
 
its all about the labels making a quick $$ doesnt matter if its some talentless crap if it plays to a certain market for a year or two and sells big thats all that matters then when ppl get bored go find another artist/group that is just a clone of the one you dropped and repeat the cycle
 
im horribly bored with music today in general
i never listen to the radio and occasionally watch television now.
i just think music and tv have declined so much in quality
it just seems like it's cover after cover or sample after sample for music or with the same hip hop beats that are dominating the airwaves
and for television it's just the same ideas being churned out all the time or just ridiculous reality or dating shows.


You just saved me some precious time. I agree with ALL you said.

MTV sucks. It couldn't be worse.

And if SOULJA BOY is Number 1 at ALL the charts - what else is there to say?
 
I say there is nothing wrong with current pop music. Why?. Because I'm not bored with it. I'm just not impressed. There are a few really great songs, so why complain? Listen to the great music. Don't listen to the awful Soulja Boy or the 'talents' of Flo Rida. Pick the good songs.
 
Last edited:
There's plenty of talent out there...

Okay, not talented like MJ mayby but they are talentented nontheless..

The game is to find these artists, you will not find a lot of them on MTV most of the time...
 
I have to wholeheartly agree...It doesn't matter if you are talented or not...

The industry has taken the originality, creativity away and has focused on what is marketable...$$$. By doing so, they have sacrificed and continue to miss out on the natural talent (s) of Artist (s) that if given the opportunity have the staying power of being a classic that will always be a part of history..!
 
true :yes:


there are some good artists out there though.

I was loving Sneaky Sound System when they debuted last year, I think they have an awesome sound.

Actually there are a few great artists popping up in Australia at the moment worth checking out :yes:
 
There's great music out there.

Just don't listen to the radio :lol: Pick the artists u like, put them on ur Ipod and roll lol Thats how i do it lol. Pick the one or two songs on the Now/Totally Hits CDs and be on your marry way....

Until MJ comes back again ;)
 
Last edited:
well i never claimed we had a talent like Michael. i actually said "i'm not saying we have a Michael-esque talent that has been lying dormant somewhere".

my point was to counter your notion that we "lack artists who can come up with something new and decent". they're in fact there (and always have been) if you look outside of the current mainstream. we had the neo-soul bloom back in around 1995 with the likes of D'Angelo and Erykah Badu and that went largely unnoticed until Lauryn Hill came in with her solo album. somewhere along the line, this went right downhill throughout the new millennium and it in fact progressed while underground and we still have genius artists like Dwele and Meshell Ndegeocello who are (and have been) indecently ignored by big record labels. this is just one example of where there is still creativity and a source of something new to be exploited with the aid of big labels - and i'm sure there are other genres in the same position.

like we agreed on, it seems to be the cowardly attitudes of business-orientated labels that are largely at fault for the lack of creativity in the game. and of course Michael raised the bar, who can argue with that!
Hmm. I guess what I meant to say was 'something new and great', something huge that might have a global impact, or be revolutionary in some way.

What about the way major record labels have been reputedly limiting creativity by enforcing control over their artists? Homogenizing the playing field with the usual elements and such. I thought being underground stimulated creativity, in general. Wouldn't these artists be better off (creatively, not monetarily) staying underground? Then maybe some of them could 'bust out' with something new and different that would sweep the globe...

I checked out Dwele, who I was not familiar with, and enjoyed what I heard. Is he not signed to Virgin records?

About neo-soul; what exactly is new about it? To me it sounds pretty much like soul. Although I confess to not having heard much of it.

I still don't know that I would blame the record exec.s for being cowardly; it just makes good business sense not to take risks, especially in such a risky business. In any case, it seems that some of the decision process on today's artists is being left in the hands of the general public and a panel of judges on reality shows such as American Idol etc. I wonder if that's better or worse.

Maybe the moral of the story is that we should listen to more underground and indie stuff?
 
To use the word BORED in my estimation is an understatement!

What the hell ever happened to the excitement in music????? I never thought I'd say this but, bring back the '80's and early 90's!

I have been disappointed by all the releases thus far from Janet, Mariah, Madonna etc. (and for some strange reason, that damn song by Snoop Dog - 'Sensual Seduction' keeps playing back in my head...damn!....that cna't be good!)
 
What about the way major record labels have been reputedly limiting creativity by enforcing control over their artists? Homogenizing the playing field with the usual elements and such. I thought being underground stimulated creativity, in general. Wouldn't these artists be better off (creatively, not monetarily) staying underground? Then maybe some of them could 'bust out' with something new and different that would sweep the globe...
that's the point though, why should big labels limit creativity? that's exactly what i'm arguing against. major labels have more resources and connections to fulfill any needs of artists with huge potentials - this should be used for talent, not against limiting it.

I checked out Dwele, who I was not familiar with, and enjoyed what I heard. Is he not signed to Virgin records?
he had many problems with Virgin and left. he's with an independent label now. talked openly about it on the Giles Peterson show.

About neo-soul; what exactly is new about it? To me it sounds pretty much like soul. Although I confess to not having heard much of it.
because it is soulful music lol unless you mean it sounds like the soul genre of the 60s/70s then i'd disagree with you. as for what's new about it - well it's a whole new genre for one thing! neo-soul is quite diverse stretching from soulful R&B to hip-hop or a fusion of both. as in nearly all inventive genres, it's a hybrid of particular styles. but the artists involved are very diverse individuals. as i said, this is just one genre i'm personally interested in that shows creative sides miles beyond what we're getting on the radio. i'm sure there are more Pop-friendly artists/producers/writers out there who can definitely bring something new to the table.

I still don't know that I would blame the record exec.s for being cowardly; it just makes good business sense not to take risks, especially in such a risky business.
i guess that's where we have to agree to disagree here..

In any case, it seems that some of the decision process on today's artists is being left in the hands of the general public and a panel of judges on reality shows such as American Idol etc. I wonder if that's better or worse.
worse because ultimately it isn't left in the hands of the general public. most wouldn't hear underground or new material to be able to judge. it's up to the influential labels to bring that to the people. marketing and commercialism seems to be where it's all at these days and i guess to them if it works, then why fix it ¿.
 
Well, I am bored by music in general, not just pop music. There are many talented artists out there and they are not being played on the radio. I only listen to the radio for the talk and the old school songs. I mostly listen to urban radio stations because it is just my taste. I am a serious music lover so I am into the music and the lyrics and like the rest of pop radio, urban radio is really becoming boring. Whenever I hear a new song it is always the same type of music. It is pretty pathetic. I only listen to a few: Alicia, Usher, Common (when they play him), Chrisste Michelle (when they play her) and I am looking forward to the return of Nas.

I cannot STAND pop radio because the music is just terrible. Ten years ago, you could not tell me that pop and urban radio was trash. I was a huge fan of the BSB, Nsych, etc. When I look back, I was such a loser!! LOL. The BSB?! Gosh.....I cannot even listen to them right now. However, I now see why so many people at that time, said what they said about those artists - the music was not great. I regret liking their music, well, I still like some of Nsych's songs!! LOL. Anyway, the point I am making is that radio today is not really for me and that it is catered to the younger crowd. That is the issue.

When you see Madonna and Mariah sounding like their suppose counterparts, it is actually quite sad. Here are two icons that does not need to fit in to get a hit record on the charts. They defined "fitting in". This is what I am worried about concerning MJ because I do not want him to do songs in order to "fit in" or hit the charts. MJ is not known for that. That is why I do not like YRMW or anything Rodney Jerkins produced in Invincible. When I hear "4 Minutes" and "Touch my Body", I just shake my head because these women do not have to make these songs to fit in. They are in a point in their lives/careers when they should be doing songs that fits them and not songs that Britney or Rihanna are doing. That is why, I believe, Janet is not doing well in the charts. She is doing songs that are too young for her.

I also think it is the industry. We are fed too much of Miley Cyrus and not enough of actual talented singers. I am sorry, I am not the one to bash artists, but Miley Cyrus aka Hannah Montana is a damn fraud. I do not see the appeal of this little girl. She is a lucky 15 year old girl that is making money for her and her siblings' college tutition. That is how I see it. She has no real talent. We all heard her sing - she must be kidding. However, I think she knows that she can't sing and knows that these children, that are her fans, are too desensitized with bad singers and they are not going to listen to someone that has actual talent. Plus, what kid does not like the questionble Disney corporation? The industry are not looking for the next great artists. They are more concerned about who is the next MJ, Prince, Madonna, Whitney, Janet, Mariah, Rolling Stones, etc., (basically replacments of those artists) and not looking for the next great musician, rapper, singer, entertainer. I think that is the main problem. Let's look at American Idol - why are so many talented singers/musicians on that show? I mean, David Cook was awesome last night and that is someone that should be played on the radio and having a video on heavy rotation on these so called music/pop culture channels. Why is he singing in a talent show? This is what I mean. These so called music execs are not looking for the next great entertainer, they are looking for the next "star". The next tabloid foddler. The next person they can manipulate and destroy so they can get paid. I mean, look at Britney Spears - exactly my point. She has no real talent and she might have, if people actually took the time to get it out of her. I mean, look at Rihanana and Chris Brown - they have star power, but they can't sing and they remind you of MJ and Janet. Chris Brown wants to be JUST like MJ and he knows damn well he cannot even come close. Rihanna loves ignoring her young fans. I mean, this is what I mean. They make catchy songs, but their songs have no meaning. They are just "stars" not real stars.

The radio plays these types of songs (you all know what they are) over and OVER again, every two hours. WHY?! The songs are corny!!! LOL. I wanna hear Erykah Badu's song "Honey" when I listen to Big Boy in the Morning or the Miss Jones show when she and her gang are busy being wise cracking fools. I am tired of that Ray J song, I love Usher, but I am not feeling his hit song, Beyonce is beyond played out, Common is awesome so why aren't his songs played on the radio? I mean, I am so bored by this crap. That is why I am going to stop listening to the radio as a whole and focus on trying to get my laptop fixed so I can finally download itunes (yeah, I am late, so what?) and pay a dollar to listen to REAL musicians. The Internet is the only place where you can hear real music. I am also tired to hear that the "reason" (or excuse, whichever you wanna use) on why real artists are not being played on the urban and pop stations (radio in general) is because people are not requesting them. THAT IS BULL. I believe that the people are requesting them, but since these stations are being paid by the record compaines to play their artists crap (PAYOLA), the radio djs are not going to listen to the request of the listeners and play crap that really sucks. Y'all know I hit a spot that I should have not hit and you all know I am not lying. I am fed up with the music of today. I can't stand it.

That is my two cents.
 
Difference with MJ though, and this is what he did with Invincible as well (IMO) as the other album is that he does 'fit in' so to speak...he does take elements and sounds from the music of today and meld it into his own style. Ya know New Jack Swing was soooo popular before Dangerous hit. And MJ and Teddy took NJS and meld it...and u still hear that distinct NJS in Dangerous.

Same with the electronic sounds of Invinicble. Same with the distinct 80's synthesizers in Bad (thats why TWYMMF reminds me so much of Don't You Forget About Me LOLOL).

So sounding updated and immulating sounds of today's young generation isn't BAD...I mean, that's pop music. Its popular. But the problem lies in people not creating. YOu can take what has been done, u can update your sound but you gotta bring something new to the table. You gotta bring YOURSELF to the table.

I dunno, listening to the snippets of the rest of Madonna's album (besides the 4 mins)...I think she's achieved that to an extent. I think Nelly Furtado is different at times when she wants to be. And David Cook WILL be played in rotation sooooon. Very soon. Believe that. He is incredibly popular. I think his songs are some of the most downloaded from AI.

The key is just finding the artists you like on Itunes and playing them on your own. Thats what many people are doing.
 
I say we start an 80's revolution.

I know !! I will contact NKOTB's management and get them together again ... Wish me luck :winking:
 
THERE IS gonna be an 80s revolution! :lol:

NKOTB...lol....Whitney Houston, Madonna, Michael Jackson (coming soooon lol)...I'm sure Prince will come out with something pretty soon lol

Maybe someone will make the Jheri Curl popular again :lol:

WHERE ARE YOU AT, "READY FOR THE WORLD"???? :lol:
 
Last edited:
:rofl: we're not far from it :lol:


let's not forget Cyndi Lauper :wild:


actually her and the B-52s are hooking up this year for a concert/event or something too :p
 
you can't go back in time and I wouldn't want to either. the Problem with radio back then was that they over-killed who ever was happening then. but back then if you had Synths and Programmed Beats and a video image they could sell you. in truth not a whole lot has really changed. the standout acts back then were really that good,but lets be real, there was a whole lot of fluff back then.
 
that's the point though, why should big labels limit creativity? that's exactly what i'm arguing against. major labels have more resources and connections to fulfill any needs of artists with huge potentials - this should be used for talent, not against limiting it.

he had many problems with Virgin and left. he's with an independent label now. talked openly about it on the Giles Peterson show.

because it is soulful music lol unless you mean it sounds like the soul genre of the 60s/70s then i'd disagree with you. as for what's new about it - well it's a whole new genre for one thing! neo-soul is quite diverse stretching from soulful R&B to hip-hop or a fusion of both. as in nearly all inventive genres, it's a hybrid of particular styles. but the artists involved are very diverse individuals. as i said, this is just one genre i'm personally interested in that shows creative sides miles beyond what we're getting on the radio. i'm sure there are more Pop-friendly artists/producers/writers out there who can definitely bring something new to the table.

i guess that's where we have to agree to disagree here..

worse because ultimately it isn't left in the hands of the general public. most wouldn't hear underground or new material to be able to judge. it's up to the influential labels to bring that to the people. marketing and commercialism seems to be where it's all at these days and i guess to them if it works, then why fix it ¿.
Maybe the case is similar to the tabloids, in a way. Tabloids are garbage, but people buy them by the shipload. If there was no demand for them, tabloids would not exist. Maybe it's the same thing with the music industry. If peeps stopped buying the lesser quality records from the big labels, then maybe things would change. The record labels would be forced to try to find higher quality stuff. Maybe it's up to the general public to take a stand.

In any case, the whole music industry is changing what with downloads, itunes etc. So it'll be interesting to see what develops.

Not sure exactly what this comment-
because it is soulful music lol
was in answer to.

True that there's a whole heap of genre blending going on; the number of genres that exist is growing exponentially. Maybe it's just me, but often when I hear songs where there is this kind of crossing, (which happens a lot,) I just think 'oh, that's this and that mixed together.' But nothing has made me sit up and say 'wow, that's fantastic and awesome.' But that's my problem, I guess.
 
Music just sucks now and Im sick and tired of people making excuses for it. Artists are not orginal and alot of them don't have FOREAL TALENT to begin with. It seems like anybody can get a record deal and in like one two three your everywhere. Music is not about music anymore. Its about what Sells and staying self. Its about selling a image. All these artists out now especially mainstream, ALL SUCK and are not contributing to the music industry. Its just hype to brainwash you into thinking a musical revolution is going on when its not. Im pretty sure the music companies etc know its not thats why they push these mediocrity into our faces to sell some ish. Its tired and im tired of crap music but thats why I listen to old school its the BEST.
 
Maybe the case is similar to the tabloids, in a way.

--

If peeps stopped buying the lesser quality records from the big labels, then maybe things would change.

The record labels would be forced to try to find higher quality stuff. Maybe it's up to the general public to take a stand.
in a way, i think it is quite like tabloids in that such particular audiences would go for whatever is fed to them without effort to dig deeper and outside the box into something they may find more stimulating. how would they be aware of underground/lesser-known talent unless they get decent exposure, promotion and marketing from the labels? i think the output is heavily controlled by the executives and the formula is to stick to what works financially.

In any case, the whole music industry is changing what with downloads, itunes etc. So it'll be interesting to see what develops.
i agree. i think it will (and it is) revolutionising the sale of niche music as opposed to perpetuating mainstream conformity. more and more people around the world are getting easy and open access to a wider horizon of music and they can quite easily find their niche in it. that's if our anticipation of a complete digital-rule comes to fruition which it seems to be doing.

but then again it will be up to labels to promote and market artists into popularity. so i believe we'll still need a change from their end.

Not sure exactly what this comment- was in answer to.

True that there's a whole heap of genre blending going on; the number of genres that exist is growing exponentially. Maybe it's just me, but often when I hear songs where there is this kind of crossing, (which happens a lot,) I just think 'oh, that's this and that mixed together.' But nothing has made me sit up and say 'wow, that's fantastic and awesome.' But that's my problem, I guess.
it was in response to "sounds pretty much like soul". personal tastes aside, soul music has become quite elemental in that even our standard contemporary R&B of the late 80s-90s had a founding influence from it. so R&B is 'just' another fusion of different genres. unless you're a pioneer like John Cage or something, i believe almost every popular genre is made up of close/distinguishable influences from others before it. as for what you may like of current music, i think it's just a matter of putting effort to hunt and dig for it since we have that easy option with the internet. or you may never find something current you like lol but great talent and creativity is still there imo...
 
Nope, i've got my Shakira and Amy Winehouse! :D

I'm waiting for Michael though..
 
the likes of Amy Winehouse and Erykah Badu definitely deserve their success (and more) but i think they're an exception from many other less deserved acts the industry is feeding us...
 
Back
Top