If you have to pick one,what vocal music you like?

[Marona]

Staring at the Sun from Offspring...damn i gotta buy their soundtrack or something.They rox0rzhttp://www.rpgamers.info/images/smilies/love.gif

[Yojimbo]

most musics from the late 60s-early 90s.

Personal Fave performers and bands are; Queen, Bowie, Meatloaf, Led Zepellin and many others, the list is very long.

currently listening to Led Zepellin "the battle of evermore"

ok pick one of my fave songs, that would have to be 'Saviour Machine', David Bowie

[Grey Fox]

Well by your statement and the 'offspring' thing I would say that u do not have an array of music knowledge. I could be wrong but why that particular song why not stairway to heaven or sentinel by Mike Oldfield or spread your wings by queen.

I would like to hear your music opinions on this issue and would u agree with my opinion that music from the 60's, 70's and 80's is the best. And is better than the present

Boomshanka!

[bjp4444]

that's really sort of general statement, isn't it? i certainly can't say that all music from the 60s, 70s, and 80s is better than everything from today. i guess it really is all personal taste. one day, i could listen to the same eminem cd over and over. the next, a video game soundtrack or some beethoven. and i know a motown compilation has to be in there somewhere too. music preference is such a resultant of mood (at least in my eyes), it's uncanny.

myabe i'm odd, but i really think i can say that there isn't a type of music i WON'T listen too. i can be up for anything, from stefani to steel day; from britney to bach. sure i like some classics (see the motown reference up above), but i think some stuff from today is brilliant also (see eminem reference).

as a question, though; what specifically makes it better than today's music? just wondering....

go pistons! (32-19, 1st Central Division)
-bjp

[Kilu]

Nothing makes older music better than newer music. It's all about preferences. I like a lot of different kinds of music myself.

In this case though, 'vocal music' is rather vague description. Any music with vocals or music which concentrates on vocals rather than music? Redefine the question and I'll answer :D

[Yuffie]

Disney love songs. All of them! *sigh* :love:

It's nice to see a perfect world but if you analysed the marriages in disney films, chances are they wouldn't last long. Usually with people who hardly know each other and at one point in the film they'll have fallen out because they were betrayed or something. :p

But I still like the love songs. :love:

[daniel]

have to disagree.....todays music is largely inferior. Not getting into a war about this this time. Not oin the mood haha but I have to say, where are the beatles, queen, abba, rolling stones, dire straits, led zeppelin, pink floyd of today? Where are the original writers esp here in britain.

Its a crying shame that it will take time but bands of real calibur will reappear, history does and will repeat and the mid nineties to whenever most of this crap today ends will be judged...and that judgement won't be anything positive

[silverDistortioN]

what makes today's music largely inferior?

[Zeugma 440]

I also tend to think the same... That's fun now that I think about it, but it is precisely because of the crappiness of nowaday's mainstream music that I progressively switched to soundtracks and more obscure artists (i.e. those who almost never appear on radio).

I still listen to my father's CDs, though... artists from the 70's and 80's like Dire Straits, The Carpenters, Genesis, Queen or Mike Oldfield.

IMO, what makes today's (mainstream) music that terrible is linked to mass mediatization. Take any band who makes a hit : a certain kind of sound with a certain way of singing. Wait for one month and you'll start hearing goddamn copies : so-far-unknown groups that come out of nowhere with songs that sounds too much like the first one, from the other band.

At this point you could tell me : yeah, okay, but the very same think keeps happening with movie soundtracks (for instance, the Gladiator and Matrix scores have had a huge impact on newer soundtracks).
Granted, but when a composer wants to sell his product, the only way for him to get public is either to make quality music, or to be inspired by quality music.

With mainstream artists, we've got another factor : appearance, charisma, sex-appeal. As I read it somewhere yesterday, Britney would never have had this success without her music videos and evocative titles. At one point, and for many artists, music seems to exist on the 2nd plan while appearance and style are predominant. Even if many bands of the 60's / 70's also had a very strong and personal style and played on that too, it looked more like the logical consequence of their spirit than a trick to lure public on.

[last paragraph erased... this post is long enough, and I'd like to see where the debate will head for :)]

[Yojimbo]

some of todays music is good like ,Blink182, Busted, Avril Lavigne and other rock artists but they dont even compare to Queen etc. Todays music success (especially for the woman) depends upon looks, would Britney be a success if she was an obese person with glasses, i think not, and all these managers and that should go to hell for making them succsful on other peoples musics.

[daniel]

Yojimbo and zeugma, you are totally correct.

It just annoys me but I too turned to movie and game soundtracks to fill the void that is left by the untalented of today (let's hope they don't all start copying game soundtracks). It's become more and more about money and less and less about talent.

Who is gonna make an original song when they can get their managers to come up with a tantalizing copy of someone else's work. And of course the gullible public buy it all....they are brainwashed and I feel sorry for them and their lack of musical knowledge.

Britney? hahaha she has about as much talent as a dung beetle (ooops they are quite talented at what they do! They have some skill when they roll that dung). But just look at her fame......what a planet:(

[bjp4444]

so i'm guessing elvis' sex appeal had nothing to so with his success? and i'm the guy who will always take an elvis tune over the beatles.

i'm not trying to claim that britney spears the greatest musician that the world has ever seen, but if people didn't want to listen to it, then they wouldn't have bought it (which is precisely what is happening now, they don't want to listen to it). and yes, if all the fourteen year old girls of the world want to listen to the same thing, then they do count, sorry.

like i said before, music preference is such a relative thing. in my view, it really does not matter if the singing the song in the one who wrote it. quite honestly, the beat of a song moves me more than anything else. it has to be something i can move to, that what music is for me. i don't need a long, drawn out sone that's all about oranges, but is really about love or suicide. i like my music simple, with a profound absence of metaphor or veiled meaning or whathaveyou. not to say that i don't listen to or like some music like this, it's just not what i prefer.

not saying anyone is wrong or right, just trying to say that there are like 47 sides to the argument, and each of them is right (in their own way).

go pistons! (32-19, 1st central division)
-bjp

[daniel]

EDITED

*stays silent*

[Kilu]

Yeah, one example comes to mind right now. After Evanescences success there has been couple other very similar bands trying their wings. Within Temptation would be the most recent probably. When I heard that Stand my Ground (or whatever their hit song was) I thought I was listening to Evanescnce. Only later I found out that I was not. Man, it sucks really.

Well anyway, I don't listen to mainstream. Lately I have been forced to listen to radio at work, so I have heard some of the new stuff that is out there in the open. I'm not too impressed with most of them.

But there is brilliant, interesting, intelligent music out there. You just need to know where to look for it.

[silverDistortioN]

i don't need a long, drawn out sone that's all about oranges, but is really about love or suicide. i like my music simple, with a profound absence of metaphor or veiled meaning or whathaveyou. not to say that i don't listen to or like some music like this, it's just not what i prefer.ha! XD
i'm just the opposite, really... that's what made me decide mindless self-indulgence sucks. suck. (depending on whether or not you prefer to refer to bands in plural form... >.>)

anyway... if anyone means to imply that modern music is compromised by selling out (copying another band's sound would be an example), then keep in mind there have been many a sell-out in the past as well. remember the monkees? kiss? franz liszt even! ...although i really did like liszt.

hooray peaches! ^.~

[daniel]

sorry silver but the copies of today are totally different to how they were then...its a totaly different type and mumber of them in the modern world we now live in

[silverDistortioN]

of course they were different. but that doesn't make them *better*

[bjp4444]

again, i never tried to imply that i was some champion of today's music or anythign like that. i agree, a lot of it sucks. but then again, i think a lot of music from back in the day sucks also.

i guess, more than anything, i really dislike when people speak in absolutes. i really sets me off, i guess. it's so hard for me to see the validity of a "this is how it is" statement when opinion and preference are major factors of the discussion, that's all. i'm not saying one needs to go a mandy moore listening binge or anything, but just be mindful of the old statement, "one person's junk is another's treasure."

go pistons! (32-19, 1st Central Division)
-bjp

[DonQuixote]

I think you have to take a few things into consideration before you judge today's music compared to the yester decades and what not.
Do you like the current genres? I'm pretty sure rap wasn't too popular if at all existant in the 60's, and if you happened to not like rap then a rap less era will prolly score extra points.
Are you judging based only on the mainstream? Some of the best stuff out there is obscure and requires heavy digging to find. For instance, metal groups such as Opeth and Nightwish aren't exactly known among the entire population. Brings another point, I'm betting that all of us have alot more open/non-mainstream tastes. . .
Damn ok I forgot what that last point was gonna be but I'll get back to it if I remember.
And if you want a good (EDIT: non) mainstream band, listen to my soundtest submission if I ever get around to submitting it.

[Zeugma 440]

DonQuixote> Yes, we do judge music from the mainstream. You're absolutely right about obscure stuff being good, but the problem is that what commercials want us to listen to is terrible.

And of course the gullible public buy it all....they are brainwashed and I feel sorry for them and their lack of musical knowledge.
Yup, 'gullible' is the very word I would choose to describe the attitude of the masses, though 'brainwashed' is a bit too strong :D Just get in the tramway or any other public transport and listen to what people say concerning music. You'll hear how someone's opinion can be shaped by TV shows, tabloid columns and catchy lyrics :wonder:

so i'm guessing elvis' sex appeal had nothing to so with his success? and i'm the guy who will always take an elvis tune over the beatles.
You've got a point here. Elvis was good at singing and good-looking. What's more, rock n'roll was totally new at the moment, and Elvis was its prophet.
The wave of rock music also contributed to his success since he was kinda surfing at the top of this wave :p