Latest on MJJC

justin timberlake joins autotune and tpain

dangerous_88 said:
or at least it shouldn't be :(
Click to expand...

I agree!

Music is something you do if you feel inspired by something, and maybe has a mission with what you sing, perhaps something you'd like to tell to the rest of the world, something which have touched you deep inside. It has to be a hobby, something you're passionate about doing. Not just something you do to get money and success. Of course it's a big part of it, but if you do not put your heart and soul in it, it's just not true, and then you shouldn't be making music!
That's just my opinion :)
 
i agree with you jayjackson. i consider music something ... i dare to say divine. and it just really makes me sad to know what modern music is all about...
 
dangerous_88 said:
i agree with you jayjackson. i consider music something ... i dare to say divine. and it just really makes me sad to know what modern music is all about...
Click to expand...
Music has always been about money. It's not called the music business for nothing. In the old days, the act made nothing, but the record company did. A lot of the old blues, country, and soul acts were "paid" with Cadillacs or whatever. Even ancient folks like Beethoven didn't work for free. It's a job. It's doubtful that anyone complaining here works for free or do whatever they want at their job. That's why Prince likes to release his music himself, so he doesn't have to deal with company politics and being ripped off. People don't consider being a musician a job, that's why they download music instead of paying for it.
 
DuranDuran said:
Music has always been about money. It's not called the music business for nothing. In the old days, the act made nothing, but the record company did. A lot of the old blues, country, and soul acts were "paid" with Cadillacs or whatever. Even ancient folks like Beethoven didn't work for free. It's a job. It's doubtful that anyone complaining here works for free or do whatever they want at their job. That's why Prince likes to release his music himself, so he doesn't have to deal with company politics and being ripped off. People don't consider being a musician a job, that's why they download music instead of paying for it.
Click to expand...

thank you. and....musicians who have to look for their next paycheck, aren't necessarily devoid of a soul and a heart, and inspiration.
 
Of course it's a job. But there's a difference between an artist and someone who's doing it just to get paid. It's the difference between a boxer who's doing it just for the money and taking the easiet rout of opponents versus and boxer who's fighting to make a legacy for himself and taking on the toughest challenges even if the monitary gain is less.

An artist is someone who is compelled to create and does it because they have a purpose in brining something to reality which no one else has the ability to. You HAVE to get paid for it in the world we've created around ourselves, because the world we've created around ourselves requires currancy to live. If that world wasn't in place, artists wouldn't have to be paid to survive, nor would anyone else in any other trade. It's a matter of circumstance. But some people create for the sake of art itself, while others create for the sake of money, and those people are not artists.
 
The general population doesn't dig "art". What type of movies make the most money - action movies or "art-house films"? That's why there's the term "starving artist".
 
wannabestartinsomthin21 said:
Of course it's a job. But there's a difference between an artist and someone who's doing it just to get paid. It's the difference between a boxer who's doing it just for the money and taking the easiet rout of opponents versus and boxer who's fighting to make a legacy for himself and taking on the toughest challenges even if the monitary gain is less.

An artist is someone who is compelled to create and does it because they have a purpose in brining something to reality which no one else has the ability to. You HAVE to get paid for it in the world we've created around ourselves, because the world we've created around ourselves requires currancy to live. If that world wasn't in place, artists wouldn't have to be paid to survive, nor would anyone else in any other trade. It's a matter of circumstance. But some people create for the sake of art itself, while others create for the sake of money, and those people are not artists.
Click to expand...

i disagree with ur assertion, unless u can apply it to every trade.
and,besides..everybody idealizes about that until they look in the mirror.

i think all artists would be offended by your generalization. without exception. all artists are artists, no matter what. whether other people think of them as such, is subjective. same with boxers. i just think people tend to look down upon athletes and entertainers in that respect, with that blanket of generalization, despite the exceptions they may note.

i pretty much know i'd win a bet that Van Gogh would have not been considered an artist, if he died rich.
 
Last edited:
If Michael uses Autotune.... Music is over!

Edit....... Does Pain say at the end Autotune is on the way out or up?
 
Last edited:
Of course Van Gogh would be considered an artist if he died rich. He was an artist. I never said an artist isn't an artist if they make gobs of money at what they do. I said someone isn't an artist if they are soley in it for the money and not to create something of value which inspires people or opens their eyes to a truth, or something which creates emotion or makes emotion tangible.
 
DuranDuran said:
The general population doesn't dig "art". What type of movies make the most money - action movies or "art-house films"? That's why there's the term "starving artist".
Click to expand...

There's plenty of rich artists in the world. People who do create something which by general standards can be considered art.
 
wannabestartinsomthin21 said:
Of course Van Gogh would be considered an artist if he died rich. He was an artist. I never said an artist isn't an artist if they make gobs of money at what they do. I said someone isn't an artist if they are soley in it for the money and not to create something of value which inspires people or opens their eyes to a truth, or something which creates emotion or makes emotion tangible.
Click to expand...
That could mean anything. Justin Timberlake inspires emotion in somebody, or he wouldn't sell. Some say Yoko Ono is great, and some say her singing is noise.
 
wannabestartinsomthin21 said:
Of course Van Gogh would be considered an artist if he died rich. He was an artist. I never said an artist isn't an artist if they make gobs of money at what they do. I said someone isn't an artist if they are soley in it for the money and not to create something of value which inspires people or opens their eyes to a truth, or something which creates emotion or makes emotion tangible.
Click to expand...

but u can't know what's in someone else's head. u can't know if they are in it for the money or not. no matter what they say. and some may not see van gogh as an artist.
 
Well if ya'll think T-Pain is an artist, then that's your problem. I'm not about to get in to another useless argument. It should be obvious when someone is truly creating something of value. When it's not, then it's simply a testiment to the retardation of today's standards.

I just love it when people take one line from a post and base their whole argument on it.
 
wannabestartinsomthin21 said:
Well if ya'll think T-Pain is an artist, then that's your problem. I'm not about to get in to another useless argument. It should be obvious when someone is truly creating something of value. When it's not, then it's simply a testiment to the retardation of today's standards.
Click to expand...
I've never heard or have any interest in T-Pain's music. I don't even know who that is. My comments weren't about him or Justin Timberlake, but about the music "business".
 
wannabestartinsomthin21 said:
Well if ya'll think T-Pain is an artist, then that's your problem. I'm not about to get in to another useless argument. It should be obvious when someone is truly creating something of value. When it's not, then it's simply a testiment to the retardation of today's standards.

I just love it when people take one line from a post and base their whole argument on it.
Click to expand...

it's never obvious. there is a whole movie that could obliterate your argument..it's called 'dead poet's society'. u should see that.

people making determinations, the way you did, caused their son to commit suicide. it was a poignant moment making an excellent point.

also..besides...it's easy to crush your argument, because people always are resistant to change. sorta like someone saying that Edison is a kook for inventing the light bulb. and someone can just say you are a person that is resistant to change.

if using autotune, and Justin Timberlake doing what he does, or tpain doing what he does, saves someone's life, then that also obliterates your argument.

who is it that makes these godlike determinations of who is an artist and who is not?

who decided that Van Gogh is an artist? who wrote the history? i could go on..but i believe that me and Duran Duran made our point. lol. that's why i admire Carson Daly's attitude so much. he said he respects the music too much to make those determinations. he was one of the best things to happen to mtv.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top