>>50894490 EDM is riding the rave wave 20 years after the rave wave happened in yurop and elsewhere in the world. Actual modern electronic dance music is much more interesting than this commercialized EDM schlock.
>>50894552 When I say EDM, I meant Electronic Dance Music, as it stands. That is literally what the letters stand for, after all.
I'd argue that Modern EDM if it is as diverse and boundary-pushing as you say is riding the Futurist-Concrète-Stochastic wave 85 years after it happened, but hey, prove me wrong. Show me something groundbreaking.
>>50894719 >That is literally what the letters stand for Not in the slightest anymore. EDM refers to the american big room electro-house stuff, everything else is referred to as electronica or just dance music in places that know their shit.
Also I'm not arguing about innovation, I am arguing about freshness. I don't agree that rock music is dead but it's self-evident that there aren't many genuinely new acts in the rock realm in this day and age like there were up until the late 90s or so. Last rock thing I liked was Panda Bear's new single (if you can even call that rock).
The question still remains: why listen to contemporary rock and electronic when they're both just rehashing each other and their predecessors, who frequently achieved greater success than they ever will ?
>>50895874 The point is you name-drop artists instead of providing arguments as to why those artists are fresh or original. I can't speak about electronic music before you yourself explain your own reasoning behind the artists that you listed.
>>50895710 Because in general, popular music tends to be more interesting than the experimental art music of the past. "greater success" what what? You are being vague here, my dear ban evader.
>>50896056 The limitations imposed upon popular musics are more interesting to me than the pursuits of art music composers of the past - "socially acceptable" and "cool to listen to" are only two reasons to why I think so. This is a subjective aspect, I see no reason to argue this further.
>>50895416 >Bear in mind, you've not provided a single counterexample. Hannah Diamond A. G. Cook D R E A M™ Sophie Lipgloss Twins Life Sim Lipgloss Twins マクロスMACROSS 82-99 Maxo 猫 シ Corp. JΛSMINE チェスマスター Stereo Component Felicita GFOTY
>>50896123 >The limitations imposed upon popular musics The only limitations in this day and age are knowledge and skill of the composer / arranger. Synthesizers and magnetic tape have seen to that. What limitations are you talking about ?
>>50895986 Well, we already agreed that originality goes clearly in favour of rock, jazz and classical over electronic music.
Every groundbreaking advance in electronic music was already done somewhere between 1913 and 1950 (with the exception of digital synthesis - which was fully actualised in the mid 70s).
So all we have left to discus is this nebulous notion of 'freshness'. What is freshness without innovation? Until you can better define the parameters of your argument, all I can possibly point to is the constant stream of new artists being published and gaining recognition in a dozen other genres just as (if not more) prolifically as/than in electronic music.
In essence, you have to "speak about electronic music before [I myself] explain [my] own reasoning behind the artists that [I] listed", because a) you are defining the parameters of the argument I'm defending against, and b) the onus of proof falls on you.
>>50896204 A main limitation is making the music listenable and acceptable, for example - a dancefloor setting; appealing to a certain market instead of pursuing your own unlimited artistic desires, riding trends in other words. This limitation is seen as artistic suffocation to some but for me it is minimalistic genius at trying to make something interesting from something so little. The art composers of the past were too bombastic and multilayered for me to prefer them; the popular artists that take influence from them make the same music but one layer at a time. It's a case of either eating a salad, or eating each of the ingredients that make up the salad separately, once at a time. I appreciate those art composers but I still prefer popular music for this exact reason.
>>50896310 > between 1913 and 1950 Between 1940 and 1980. Electronic music in it's current for didn't come to be until the late 70s, and didn't bloom up until the 80s or so.
>originality >innovation These are arbitrary concepts tbh. I lost track of the argument I myself have been making up to this point, but perhaps it would be better to substitute "freshness" for "variety". I don't see many rock bands in this year expressing the same value of artistic variety (and based on that, innovation) that I see in electronic dance music artists from this year. Again; I liked Panda Bear's new single. I like it when rock music doesn't attempt to sound like rock music and goes to become something alies for the general masses, in the end appealing only to a single specific niche. Much I like prefer the /bleep/ electronic dance music to the american-accepted EDM, I prefer underground rock genres of the past to the established upper ground classics which characterized rock music as we know it. Perhaps what I'm saying is that rock music's underground isn't what it used to be back in the days.
>>50896744 >Electronic music in it's current for didn't come to be until the late 70s, and didn't bloom up until the 80s or so.
Exactly my point. Nothing original or innovative has been brought into the genre since then.
You seem very confused about what you want. You claim to like innovation, and bands changing up the established archetypes, but then you claim that artistic merit comes from making something that is easily digestible and palatable.
Also, rock music's underground is a million times more diverse, expansive and interesting than it ever has been before - you're just more divorced from it. If any aspect of rock has suffered the most in the last 10 years, it has been the mainstream, broadly consumed portion, not the underground and the subgenres.
It's absurd to argue that popular music isn't behind art music in therms of development. The innovations I was talking about were about popular musics, and I wasn't talking as much about "electronic music" as I was about "electronic dance music" and "electronica", the style of electronic music that are part of the popular music spectrum. Electronic music in it's deep, artistic form is still evolving and innovating in isolated research facilities and whatnot; but those innovators aren't popular because they don't care as much about mass fame or glory, they don't aim for accessibility but aim for progress and innovation. They form a niche market which might include musicians of rock and electronica music, which take influence from them and in result present those musics in a less raw, more accessible form for the upper markets. The reason I prefer electronic music to rock music in 2014 is because I fail to see rock music having as much variety, or development as electronic music in this same year. It's arguable that electronic music in 2014 is yet to reach the heights rock music presented us in the 60s and 70s, but as it is in 2014 electronic music has rock music beat to the punch. Krautrock is the highest form of rock music in my honestest opinion.
>>50897051 >upper markets "upper" as in less underground, more popular markets. Not artistically "upper".
>>50896947 I got tired of rock music's underground around 2010-2012 or so, so in a way you could call me ignorant of the more modern rock underground and more biased towards modern electronica musics. I appreciated World's End Girlfriend for pushing-up rock music in 2010 albeit in my opinion it was very plastic-ish and cheesy.
>>50897240 I can't blame you, there's a lot of shit to sift through in order to find the gems.
You heard Jizue's 'Journal' (or Mouse on the Keys' 'Machinic Phylum'), 잠비나이's '차연', Ленинград's 'Рыба', Ufomammut's 'Oro: Opus Alter' and 'Oro: Opus Primum', Trioscapes 'Separate Realities', T.R.A.M.'s 'Lingua Franca', Panzerpappa's 'Astromalist', Mombu's 'Zombi', or either of Daughters later albums?
They all had a pretty unique sound to them. Maybe I can convince you back :P
>>50896310 >the measure of how good music is is entirely dependent on every single piece of music that came before it lrn2formalism you noob
>>50896744 >I lost track of the argument I myself have been making up to this point >but perhaps it would be better to *retreads entire argument* >Perhaps what I'm saying is that... >tl;dr i dont know what im saying but im hoping something sticks bro holy shit learn to argue effectively
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at [email protected] with the post's information.