What's worse, poptimism or rockism?

using meme terms is worse

Cuban jazzism is worse than both

ewww do you guys seriously still listen to guitar music

File: 1494898616981.jpg (86KB, 818x720px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 818x720px

>>73297909

>>73297909
Neither, people who actually enjoy music and not give a fuck what it does for their image don't care.

>>73298046
well said

rockism is just more logical than than the release structure of other genres

>>73298046
even though I agree Brandon. what people like and their tastes in things can say so much about a person.

>>73297909
I don't know if there's a term for it, but I'll call it "patricianism" - liking an album simply because it's more obscure or less accessible than the alternative.

It's a lazy way of appearing knowledgeable about music because you don't have to articulate or defend your opinions, just accuse others of not "getting" it.

>>73297909
i personally think poptimism has done more damage to music criticism, and to some extant popular music as a whole, but that's because no one actually follows the "tenants" of poptimism correctly
>>73298046
rockism and poptimism don't have much to do with the image of the listener for the most part. it's mainly about how critics review music.

>>73298190
That's really only relevant on /mu/ though. Poptimism and rockism have both permeated major music journalism sites.

>>73298046
Thank you, Brandon. Exactly my thoughts.

>>73298046
we're talking about music criticism here mate. those two terms have nothing to do with personal image.

>>73298283
>That's really only relevant on /mu/ though.

No it's not. You often get critics celebrating obscure bands for being "influential" and "forward-thinking", getting caught up in the fact that they were somewhat offbeat for their time or just never made it big. The United States of America springs to mind.

Or look at Death (the 70s punk band). The revival of interest in that band came from the fact that they're not well-known and predate Ramones yet carry some recognizable punk tropes. But people forget that they were basically just another garage hard rock band influenced by Alice Cooper and MC5 and detroit bands of that ilk. If critics didn't hype them as "punk before punk" (even though there were tons of other garage bands like that) no one would have cared about them.

People love the "dude, these guys should've been stars and are so much better than the mainstream tripe" narrative.

dadrock is shit but it's not as bad as AYY NIGGA BITCH I EAT PUSSY or whatever rappers rap about

>>73298451
>you get critics celebrating obscure bands for being "influential" and "forward-thinking"
>The United States of America springs to mind
But The USA is a great example of an incredible, influential band that got less attention than it deserved

>Or look at Death
The revival of interest came about because they were almost completely forgotten due to their record label. Plus, you can credit their revival more to that movie than to mainstream music critics. Honestly, it's kinda a good thing that the band got revived, they made good music. I see no issues there.

>>73298530
>But The USA is a great example of an incredible, influential band that got less attention than it deserved
As a psych pop band they were pretty middle-of-the-road, interesting as a historical footnote for their synthesizer shit but they never had the potential to be a truly great psych band. At least in my opinion.

>I see no issues here
My point was just that it's not "irrelevant", that obscuratant thing is a very mainstream impulse. What the Death thing is supposed to show is that any somewhat bland (or otherwise forgettable) band can be propped up with the right amount of media hype.

File: 1495900502164.jpg (76KB, 959x722px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 959x722px

Autism

>>73298728
But that isn't a bad thing (nor does it happen nearly as often as poptimism or rockism) in the two cases you made.

>pretty middle-of-the-road
gonna hafta disagree with you there, but it's subjective anyways

>>73297909
Poptism, I don't know why are you even asking.

>>73298759
Propping up forgettable crap simply because it's obscure/inaccessible IS a bad thing, at least if you consider duping people by being image-obsessed to be a bad thing.

Same reason propping up trashy mainstream pop is a bad thing, or propping up rock as the be-all end-all of music is a bad thing. It encourages group think and discourages criticism.

>>73298778
I swear there are record company shills on the Internet that are actually trying to make "poptimism" a thing, and people are falling for it. I know that's a dumb thing to think but it's almost more bearable than the alternative, which is to accept that people really do have such indefensibly awful taste.

>>73298918
>I don't like things and everyone else has to feel the same way
This is a music forum, and if you don't want to generally talk about music you can ignore it or fuck off.

>>73298860
But it's not objectively forgettable crap, that's your opinion. This is a case where I think that critics are doing a good thing in exposing largely forgotten music to a place where it can be judged and discussed (and enjoyed).

>>73298942
You have every right to be insulted for your taste on a music forum.