Seriously, I'm curious as to what good music taste is. I'm certainly not a fan of the Jonas Brothers, but I've read posts by people who claim that what they make isn't music. Also, I've read a long argument on these boards determining whether or not good music taste exists.
IMO, it doesn't. I just don't see how there can be, since everyone has a different view on music. Discuss?
"The worst time to have a heart attack is during charades - Demetri Martin
"Good music taste" is a bit too trivial... so how about summing up "good music." Some people see good music as anything they can bob their heads to, no matter how mainstream, unoriginal, uncreative, and uninspired it is. The Jonas Brothers would fall into said category, but they make it even worse. By not only making music that is all of the aforementioned, they are nothing more than a corporate marking product/tool for Disney corporation. You have any idea how much dough Disney is bringing in through the Jonas Brothers and Hannah Montana being so popular? Poor parents have to throw their wallets into the burner because their 10-year-old daughter thinks the Jonas Brothers are "so hawt!"
As a musician of many years I appreciate music that takes some real talent to create. I like lyrics that have meaning or are interesting... not this bubble-gum pop bull the Jonas Brothers sing about that might as well be farting rainbows and crapping Lucky Charms. It is impossible for anyone who has an extensive background in music to see the Jonas Brothers as real musicians... because they are not; they are an advertisement.
So, does good music taste exist? It depends on who your speaking to... to a prepubescent girl the Jonas Brothers trump the likes of Pink Floyd, Led Zeppelin, The Beatles, etc, and Nick Jonas is a better guitar player than Stevie Ray Vaughan... it's nonsense.
I see your point. I was just curious as to how someone could even sum up the term 'good music taste' because I myself am skeptical of the term. Indeed, there is either good or bad music, and then there is another that I like to call an 'abysmal marketing tool'. *cough*jonas*cough*
Also, I would like to mention that Kevin Jonas has one of the biggest noses on the Earth.
"The worst time to have a heart attack is during charades - Demetri Martin
Music is completely subjective there is no such thing as good or bad taste. Those arrogant enough to think that their opinions outweigh those of everyone else tend to be the ones deciding what is considered "good" or "bad" music.
shareWell said kuba17, well said.
shareYeah, if a band is good to listen to or not is a matter of opinion, but if a band is good (talented and all) or not is a matter of fact. Inspiring, creative and original music is good music, uninspiring ans unoriginal music isn't good music.
Someone who mostly listens to inspiring, creative and original music has a better music taste than someone who mostly listens to uninspiring and unoriginal music.
But what you define as insipiring, creative and original may only be those things to you. And what you define as unoriginal and uninspiring may just be unoriginal and uninspiring to you so your theory is really not true.
shareGod, not everything is subjective... It's like saying that every single band on the planet is inspiring, creative and original because atleast one person thinks that they are. Many bands are uninspiring and unoriginal as a matter of fact. You don't need to be a genius to realize that a band is uninspiring and unoriginal (well, you need to know a lot of music). Their music doesn't express any feeling and their sound is nothing new and/or their riffs/melodies are nothing new. A lot of the music on the radio is like that, but a lot of people don't realize it because it's the only music that they listen to.
The bands that I define as inspiring, creative and original have their own unique sound, express feelings with their music (the music expresses what the lyrics talk about) and can come up with new/fresh riffs/melodies.
Btw, some of the bands that I listen to aren't really good... I like to listen to them, but I know that they're not very inspiring and original.
Who is really origninal no one they all ripped off someone that has come before them thats why its all about subjectivity.
The way you describe inspiring, creative and original can be said about almost any entertainer around. The only reason someone may feel something is new and inspiring is just because it's their first time hearing it. But it really has all been done before, heck even the Beatles weren't all original. Their type of music was being played in England and when they brought thier style here it was new to us.
There is nothing really new, original or creative, and music is subjective.
"Who is really origninal no one they all ripped off someone that has come before them."
"it really has all been done before"
If you really think this way, you need to listen to more music. A LOT of bands aren't original, but a couple are very original.
Do you even know the meaning of inspiring and creative? Many entertainers/bands don't even try to come up with something original and their music don't express anything.
My taste is very eclectic and I listen to many new bands/singers all the time and true some seem more creative to me but that's just because there is something they are doing that I like. While to others they may just seem generic. Again that is just subjectivity.
Every entertainer/singer doesn't have to change history with thier sound they just have to please some and if they are doing that then they are successful at what they do.
But Noseofnicko pls share with me your definition of inspiring and crative i'm truely interested in your opinion you seem to be one of the few here that can discuss without resorting to immature name calling.
Well, it's pretty simple. Inspiring and creative music expresses feelings (not only with the lyrics but also with the music) and makes you feel things and sounds new and unique. Just a short definition.
Saying that there is nothing original these days is ignorant. Almost everything on the radio isn't original, but many not very (or not at all) famous bands are very original. Right now, metal is probably the most original and creative music genre (don't be close minded, if you know anything about the genre, you know that it's not noise at all, that noisy bands like Slipknot don't represent the genre at all). I know many bands that really work hard to come up with new melodies, I know many bands that combine music genres (metal+jass, metal+opera, metal+egyptian music, metal+medieval music, etc...), I even know a few bands that combine almost every music genre and of course, there are the avant-garde bands. Those bands don't sound like anything that has ever been made before. I'm not a big fan of them, but they're definitely unique.
You have to dig to find the truly inspiring and creative bands. Mediocre bands are burying them.
There is nothing that is original like I said before everyone just builds on what someone has already done.
Music that is inspiring and creative, and makes you feel things and sounds new and unique may just be those things to you yet to someone else they could experience it as something similar to what they've already heard or not inspiring. The point is it's just subjective.
Metal is not new it's been around forever what in metal is new to you?
[deleted]
"There is nothing that is original like I said before everyone just builds on what someone has already done."
Seriously, that's just stupid. What you are saying is that every single band is unoriginal and rips off Brutus the caveman who created music by hitting rocks with dinosaur bones.
You're also saying that all movies are unoriginal, that all books are unoriginal because the persons who made/wrote them were influenced by someone.
"Metal is not new it's been around forever what in metal is new to you?"
Let me guess, you don't know anything about metal? No, I'm not assuming anything about you. People who don't think that metal is very original don't know much about it. It's the most diverse music genre. It has many sub-genres that all sound VERY different. Please, don't talk about something that you know nothing about. I noticed that most people who think that music is dead and that pretty much everything is unoriginal don't know anything about metal except what's on MTV (which is mostly unoriginal or just plain bad). Metal is supposed to be heavy, right? Well, you know what? I know many metal songs that are probably the most melodic songs ever.
"Music that sounds new and unique may just be those things to you yet to someone else they could experience it as something similar to what they've already heard"
I (and all people who listen to them) KNOW that some of the bands that I listen to play music that has never been played before. Bands like Arcturus and Sigh are unique. In fact, people can't say what kind of music they play. It's something new.
"Music that makes you feel things may just be those things to you"
Yes, but many bands don't express anything. When you can replace the lyrics of a song with pretty much any lyrics because the music doesn't really have a theme, it's not a good sign.
Stop saying that everything music related is subjective. That's like saying that all bands are equal because atleast one person likes them. There are bands that are good as a matter of fact, there are bands that are bad (not talented) as a matter of fact. I can admit that I listen to a few bands that are far from great. The Jonas Brothers aren't a bad band (they have a little bit of talent), but they're nothing special. Even if you think that they're great, the fact is that you can't say that a band that plays stuff that someone who's been playing guitar for a few months could play, that writes unoriginal music and lyrics full of cliches is a great band.
Btw, how is originality subjective? Something that has been made before has been made before. Period.
Like i've said before nothing is really new or original it's just built on something already done. Simple.
Actually you are right there is some metal that is very melodic but it's not new to this day and time metal has been around a long time.
Ppl use to say the music Yanni produced was new and creative and wasn't easy to put in a box. So they gave it a new name "new age". Fact is Yannis music is based on other forms of music to this he admitts. He had influences just like every other muscian out there. They all are influenced by someone else and they just build on those influences.
Everything music related is subjective just because you need to believe differently doesn't mean you are right, just simply means you need to believe what you say. Point of fact I don't think the Jonas brothers are so great in fact they really aren't that special to me but to some they are and to those few thier music is creative, inspiring and good.
Originality isn't subjective, but there really isn't anything that is original, it's been influenced by others and built on by what others have already done.
Gino Vanelli fused rock and jazz he was said to have been an original, point in fact he was influenced by some old guys from the 50's or 60's who did the same or similar. Same of all the other entertainers they just build on what came before them.
I'm interested in what you think are original lyrics?
NoseOfNicko, I posted this a while back and decided to repost it here. It was originally in reply to your assertion that there is such a thing as good and/or bad music (where you said it depended on the degree of talent in the band and with their music/lyrics). Similarly to this:
There are bands that are good as a matter of fact, there are bands that are bad (not talented) as a matter of fact.
It's the most diverse music genre. It has many sub-genres that all sound VERY different.
I (and all people who listen to them) KNOW that some of the bands that I listen to play music that has never been played before.
What you are saying is that every single band is unoriginal and rips off Brutus the caveman who created music by hitting rocks with dinosaur bones.
You're also saying that all movies are unoriginal, that all books are unoriginal because the persons who made/wrote them were influenced by someone.
but many of the kids attracted to The Jonas Brothers only have MTV and other commercial sources as places to find music, where generally I see less than stellar talent. It's all they have, and it's the only talent they know.False.
This message is mostly towards Mount_Happy and/or anyone else who thinks the same as him/her.
First of all, I am not a 10 year old girl who only likes the Jonas Brothers because they are "so hawt!" I actually pay attention to things other than that.
Secondly, before you start saying "Poor parents have to throw their wallets into the burner..." you should probobly learn your facts, because my parents don't pay for me to go to Jonas Brothers concerts, they don't pay for me to go to the movies they don't even pay for my clothes. I pay for my own way around here, and i'm only 14; I had to grow up quicker than most people do.
Third, I do know what good music is. All of the musicians/groups you named at the bottom of your post (Pink Floyd, Led Zeppelin and The Beatles) I have heard of, and I happen to have alot of respect for their contributions to the music feild, and I know at least a few of all of their songs. Oh and by the way us Jonas Brothers fans are not stupid, most of us do know that Nick Jonas is not a better guitarist than Stevie Ray Vaughan (that's common sence), but for a 16 year old you have to admit, Nick Jonas is very good at what he does; give the kid a break like I said he is only 16.
Fourth which kinda fits in with my third reason of why The Jonas Brothers are musicians I just happened to have graduated from High school four years early and I am currently working on my Bachelor's degree in music at The University of North Texas, so I do know alot about music.
Last, but not least how many of The Jonas Brothers Songs have you actually listened to, because the way you are acting you have listened to all of their songs and think they are all "bubble-gum pop", let me tell you, I happen to know pretty much all of their songs and I don't think of their music in that way at all. Their lyrics do speake to me and many other people , and I think everyone needs to stop being so hard on these guys and actually give them a chance; that's all i'm asking.
-Kelsey
"Good music taste is a bit too trivial... so how about summing up "good music." Some people see good music as anything they can bob their heads to, no matter how mainstream, unoriginal, uncreative, and uninspired it is. The Jonas Brothers would fall into said category, but they make it even worse. By not only making music that is all of the aforementioned, they are nothing more than a corporate marking product/tool for Disney corporation. You have any idea how much dough Disney is bringing in through the Jonas Brothers and Hannah Montana being so popular? Poor parents have to throw their wallets into the burner because their 10-year-old daughter thinks the Jonas Brothers are "so hawt!"
As a musician of many years I appreciate music that takes some real talent to create. I like lyrics that have meaning or are interesting... not this bubble-gum pop bull the Jonas Brothers sing about that might as well be farting rainbows and crapping Lucky Charms. It is impossible for anyone who has an extensive background in music to see the Jonas Brothers as real musicians... because they are not; they are an advertisement.
So, does good music taste exist? It depends on who your speaking to... to a prepubescent girl the Jonas Brothers trump the likes of Pink Floyd, Led Zeppelin, The Beatles, etc, and Nick Jonas is a better guitar player than Stevie Ray Vaughan... it's nonsense."
GREAT post.
Yes, great post.
I understand that most tweens aren't capable just yet of discerning good music with what the radio plays but after a certain age, they need to realize that there's more to music than what their favorite radio station or MTV offers up; better music in most cases.
The people who think the Jonas Brothers or Rihanna are better than Fats Waller, Louis Jordan and Stevie Ray Vaughan just don't know any better. Sure, the former have the hits but whose going to give a damn about them 20, 30, 40 years later? Fats, Louis and Stevie are still revered today. Rihanna has two things going for her, her looks and Jay-Z. Without those two, nobody would care about her output.
Even after 107 listens, I still get excited to hear Fats sing "Ain't Misbehavin'" or Porcupine Tree perform "Shesmovedon". I can't say that about anybody in the Billboard Hot 100 today.
Nice to see another Porcupine Tree fan! An awesome band that beats everything that you can hear on the radio!
share[deleted]
Led Zeppelin is just ONE example.
and even if you don't like their music, you can't deny that they were/are great musicians (both as players and songwritters).
I may not like your music, but if you have talent, I will admit it.
I'm glad Obama won, but I will not jump on the Pro-Choice bandwagon
I think it depends on what the person thinks is good music. There is a generalization of what good music is such as most of the classic rock bands, which I do like. But there are so many genres of music that it's impossible to say what really is good music. Just because someone listens to a band when they're young doesn't it mean it's necessarily bad music. I started to listen to The Doors, The Beatles, NIN, Smashing Pumpkins, Led Zeppelin when I was 7. So by haters logic THAT was all crap?
Honestly though, I think most of you take this genre to seriously: pop isn't meant to be any life-changing revolutionary music but just music to listen to for fun. The Jonas Brothers are teenagers, they're main songwriter and leader is 16 years old. For their age, I do think they're talented, most of the music is about heartbreak and love but what else are they supposed to write about?
I'm not expecting them to make a Dark Side of the Moon anytime soon, but for now, I think it's fine.
And this is coming from someone who generally hated 90's pop.
Whoever controls the media control the mind
"I started to listen to The Doors, The Beatles, NIN, Smashing Pumpkins, Led Zeppelin when I was 7. So by haters logic THAT was all crap?"
For *beep* sake, who ever said such a thing? No one. Some people said that many young people listen to crap, but no one ever said that you automatically listen to crap when you're young.
"Honestly though, I think most of you take this genre to seriously: pop isn't meant to be any life-changing revolutionary music but just music to listen to for fun."
Actually, a lot of pop was good in the 80's. There were many talented pop bands. Today look is more important than talent, so that's why it's so weak.
"most of the music is about heartbreak and love but what else are they supposed to write about?"
Indeed, but they could write better lyrics about these subjects. Like I said a bunch of times, their lyrics are full or cliches. Pretty much everyone could write similar lyrics.
"There is a generalization of what good music is such as most of the classic rock bands, which I do like. But there are so many genres of music that it's impossible to say what really is good music"
Good music is inspired and original and it expresses feelings, not only with the lyrics, but also with the music itself. The music is not just catchy or memorable, it also expresses something. Writting good music is a really hard job. I could "add" more, but it's really hard to explain what makes music good. Of course, that's just my opinion, but I'm pretty sure that many people agree with me.
Oh and btw, good music doesn't have to be classic rock.
The Jonas Brothers' music might be catchy, but that's all it is. Music that is nothing but catchy gets boring really fast. It lacks substance.
mkshelly
i dont think its the genre or the age...talent or anything, its just that these guys who are far less talented than most of the bands out there of similar age...yet a million brainwashed girls scream that they are amazing and one of the best bands...
---
Ben Foster for Freddy Krueger!
Good taste in music is the appreciation of music as a whole. If you can appreciate the goods of any genre of music, see songs objectively, admit artist's talent whether or not you like their music, and actually have some sort of background with music (whether it be playing an instrument, studying music theory, etc.), if you actually understand what types of music take talent to create and what types don't, then you have good taste in music.
Led Zeppelin is a good example, I don't listen to them, don't like their music at all really, but can admit that they're an amazingly talented group. Why? Their longevity, their songwriting (which I do appreciate), their talent at writing music, etc. What makes a song good is not the same as what makes me like it.
I listen to mostly rock and roll, but the best musical genre is classical(anyone who tries to argue with me on that point is a moron). Why? Because it is so completely musically advanced, composed, composed by none other than geniuses.
A lot of people hate country music. I don't listen to country, but even I can admit much of it is very, very good (although people like Taylor Swift, etc. give it a very bad name).
Even rap, the genre of music that I take the least seriously, was at a time legitimate. When it's played with actual instruments, the lyrics are meaningful and rendered proficiently, and when it's original and not just a money-making tool, it can be some of the best music out there.
I would like to point out that techno is not really music in the sense that I'm talking about; nothing that some guy made up on a computer is music.
You have to be what I call subjectively objective, which means that you acknowledge your own musical tastes but also acknowledge, honestly, what is good music and what is bad music. It's okay to listen to some bad music, as long as you can admit that it's bad music.
[?]
There really isn't any definition for what constitute good music taste. Whatever you as an individual likes is what is good music. All these little arrogant ppl claiming that good music taste is Led Zepplin, Beatles etc...are just talking out of thier arsess "GOOD MUSIC TASTE".
Music is subjective and what ever an individual likes is good music taste.
I have a very ecletic taste in music I like almost every genre, except rap, with rock being my preference but admitting that some pop is really good.
Don't ever let some pompous boob try to make you feel guilty for liking whatever type of music you like it's all subjective.
Some bands are very talented, some bands are fairly talented, some bands are not really talented and some bands are not talented at all. That's a matter of fact.
shareIt's true that some are talented and some aren't but even the one's we as individuals deem not as talented may have fans that think they are the greatest band around. So if that band or singers music makes you happy, or makes you want to get up and dance or even makes you a little sentimental, good for them, then that music is good music.
Just because some boyband in the 60's supposedly changed the music scene doesn't make them Gods of sound. Not everyone that sings or plays an instrument has to make a hugh statement or change the world with thier music. Sometimes just a beautiful voice like Barbara or Celine, or some great harmonies like the BSB or some good rock like the Stones is enough to make me smile. And that is all music is really about, how it makes you feel and how you relate to it.
"I would like to point out that techno is not really music in the sense that I'm talking about; nothing that some guy made up on a computer is music."
I see what you are trying to say here... but you can't just blatantly remark that techno is not music. I have been following electronica as much as I have been other kinds of music. Electronic music is all about dancing and having a good time. Some electronic songs with lyrics have more meaning than other songs from a different genre. Techno and electronica is a whole other ball of wax since it is mainly instrumental and far more abstract than the casual listener can appreciate. It clearly is music also, because techno artists actually compose the songs you are hearing. There is some sampling here and there, but that adds to the artistic quality of electronic music.
In any case, good music is simply music that is unique and made with passion. A good musician is one who makes music because they love music, and don't really care about how they look or how much money they make. The money and fame naturally come about, but it's seriously all about the music and that it has meaning to it.
"Beneath this Mask, there is an Idea"
-V for Vendetta-
How do you gauge talent? There is no objective way to do so. Why? Relative experience. At a very young age, the first instrumentalist or musician you witnessed was probably very awe-inspiring, and you knew nothing better at the time so you would think that he/she has incredible talent. I remember being mesmerized the first time I saw someone play drums live. Now, I consider this person an amateur, because I'm familiar with Mike Portnoy and Carter Beauford. Similarly to that drummer, The Jonas Brothers are stepping stones for young minds' musical journeys. They may think that Nick Jonas is talented because they've never found anyone more versatile. Personally, I write both music and relatively complex lyrics, including guitar, bass, keyboard, drum, and vocal parts, using acoustic instruments. I produce, record, and mix the whole thing myself, and I've been doing this since I was 16, in my own room. In terms of live performances, I've served as drummer/backup vocalist, keyboardist/backup vocalist, or rhythm guitarist/lead vocalist. If I had been exposed as much as Nick Jonas, I'm sure there are people who would think I have talent. My point is that it's all relative - you may have a decade of musical experience, but many of the kids attracted to The Jonas Brothers only have MTV and other commercial sources as places to find music, where generally I see less than stellar talent. It's all they have, and it's the only talent they know.
shareTo all you Beatle fans pls tell me why you think they are the best band in the world. Because seriously most of the music they wrote that was considered so great was written when they were as high as kites.
share[deleted]
Who said the Jonas Brothers or any group is pure and clean? Also the lyrics to the Beatles isn't any better than the lyrics to the Jonas Brothers.
share[deleted]
I've listened to Strawberry Fields and Lucy in the Sky, and they both sound like what they are drug induced boys writing silly lyrics about a drug trip or sexual fantasy.
share[deleted]
[deleted]
I'm not that fimilar with thier music so I couldn't tell you if thier songs contain lyrics from other singers. Either way I wouldn't think that odd since most singers sing about the same themes anyway
share[deleted]
[deleted]
Me too. Jonas Brothers lyrics are so simple and they just say everything they want to say without even trying to add a little more substance to it and have artistic tones to the writing.
The Beatles' lyrics actually show some sort of a stance and things are worded so that they can be interpreted in many different ways. Jonas Bros' lyrics seem like a 12 year old wrote them.
"Beneath this Mask, there is an Idea"
-V for Vendetta-
So maybe that's why 12 year olds like the Jonas Brothers.
Taste in music is subjective, and simple lyrics or complicated lyrics it just doesn't matter. When a song makes you feel good, and speaks to you that's all that matters.
"simple lyrics or complicated lyrics it just doesn't matter"
Ehhh, speak for yourself.
Sometimes I don't mind simple lyrics, but you should put a lot of effort into your lyrics and try not to fill them with cliches. The Jonas Brothers obviously don't put a lot of effort. Like Hyperboievr said, their lyrics don't have much substance.
Oh and no one said that lyrics should be complicated, they just said that lyrics shouldn't be extremely simple and filled with cliches.
If someone like lyrics that are extremely simple and filled with cliches that's their preference and they shouldn't be ridiculed for thier likes.
share"If someone like lyrics that are extremely simple and filled with cliches that's their preference and they shouldn't be ridiculed for thier likes."
Who says we are "ridiculing" the fans? you people are making it seem that way. Never on these boards have I criticized the people who love the Jonas Brothers. I've only criticized the JBs themselves and suggested that the fans listen to better music...
"Beneath this Mask, there is an Idea"
-V for Vendetta-
What you think is "better" may not be better to anyone else. And why do you feel it is your job to tell fans of this group that they should be listening to something different. If you choose to listen to something different be happy with your decision and don't try to force your will on others.
shareomg, I don't feel that it is "my job" to FORCE things on people. I'm shouting out my opinion to stir up discussion about music, and I think I'm entitled to my opinion also. Too bad the only replies I'm getting now are the ones that tell me to get off. I just wish somebody here can actually say something logical whenever I post an opinion of mine. These aren't fan forums, they're message boards for discussion.
"Beneath this Mask, there is an Idea"
-V for Vendetta-
Yeah, we just express our opinion and instead of telling us why they think The Jonas Brothers are good, the fans tell us to *beep* off.
Honestly, I don't think I've ever heard a valid argument about why The Jonas Brothers are good. It's always "get a life", "you're a loser" or worthless arguments like "they're very successful" and "they have millions of fans".
Yeah, we just express our opinion and instead of telling us why they think The Jonas Brothers are good, the fans tell us to *beep* off.
"Otherwise, they provide relatively superficial music (so-called "bubblegum pop") that's easy to follow and easy to dance to, etc."
Well put.
This term 'bubblegum pop'...it's sounds a little ironic considering pop is a type of music. But why is it called bubblegum pop? I'm curious, as this seems to be a type of genre that most 'teenyboppers' are affiliated with.
The worst time to have a heart attack is during charades - Demetri Martin
Why does anyone have to explain to you why they like the music, who are you that you deserve an explanation. And you are such bull you are just here to put down ppl and you know it. If all you wanted to do was discuss music there are many other boards to do that on. THe fact that you choose this board and talk about how horrible the group is just proves your motive.
shareOh shut the *beep* up. I'm here because it's the most active music board right now (or atleast it was a few weeks ago) and a lot of big music fans who agree with me come here. Dunno if you noticed, but many threads aren't about The Jonas Brothers.
I don't want anyone to explain to me why they like The Jonas Brothers. I just think it'd be nice if the fans gave valid arguments when they try to say why The Jonas Brothers are good instead of saying worthless things like "they're a success" and "they have millions of fans" or insulting the people who don't like them and post here.
"Why does anyone have to explain to you why they like the music"
Btw, that's actually one of the main subjects when talking about music.
Noseofnicko -You are here for one reason and one reason only to put down ppl that have a different music taste than yours. There are many boards in which to spew your views but you choose to be on this board and knock it's fans.
As I said before no one has to explain there likes or dislikes to you or anyone else. They do have millions of fans and they are a success that's fact.
Krisluvkev, you're the idiot.
Earlier in the thread you said something like "Who is really origninal no one they all ripped off someone that has come before them".
Not EVERYONE has ripped off something that came before them. Now sure a lot of TALENTED and INSPIRED bands like Dream Theater and Iron Maiden have albums/bootlegs of them covering other songs (Maiden being the majority of the "Best of the B'Sides" CD and Dream Theater have a bootleg where they covered the whole "Number of the Beast" album in its entirety live). But to say that they rip off things that came before them is a completely weak argument. Plus there's one word you seem to be forgetting: "INFLUENCE". A lot of bands have other bands as their influences.
There are a lot of bands that mix genres. Example- Sepultura have an album entitled "Roots", which they mix metal in with the sounds of the Xavante Tribe. "Ratamahatta" begins with a tribal drum section which segues into a typical metal song but with Portuguese lyrics. As well as Apocalyptica mix classical music with Metal.
"They do have millions of fans and they are a success that's fact."
And nobody is denying that. But having millions of fans and being a success has nothing to do with how good they are. They are a crappy boy band. With cliched lyrics and simple melodies. That's a fact. NOT an opinion. 75% of fans love them only for their looks.
Noseofnicko is 100% correct and as a matter of fact, none of us come here to knock down the fans. We come to express our opinions and all the fangirls tell us to f--k off. Quite simple.
As for NoseofNicko, excellent point. It's too bad that Krisluvkev has too small of a brain or too thick of a skull to even realize.
"My eyes can see but they can't believe"- Iron Maiden
Thanks for replying for me. I'm tired of arguing with this annoying ignorant who thinks originality doesn't exist and bands like The Jonas Brothers are just as talented as bands like Rush, Pink Floyd and Dream Theater because he/she thinks talent is subjective. Oh, he/she also thinks unoriginal bands that play music that offer nothing but catchiness and write cliched lyrics are just as good as original bands that play highly expressive music and write intelligent lyrics because he/she thinks everything about music is subjective. Ooopss, it's just my opinion that their lyrics are intelligent... He/she probably thinks intelligence is subjective too. *beep* it, everything is subjective... Yeah, The Godfather isn't a better movie than Disaster Movie. Dream Theater aren't more skilled than Anal C_nt. It's all subjective.
shareBruce just like your little friend you have nothing better to do then to come to this board under the pretense of being a music lover. In fact all you are is a pretender.
As I stated before there is nothing that is original all bands are influenced by another band therefore removing any chance of originality. There isn't one band around that you can name that is truely original. A band that has created a sound not heard before. If you and your little friend have such superior taste in music and such great knowledge in music why waste your time on a board with ppl that you clearly think are less then you. One reason because you and your friend are little teen boys desparate for attention from girls and this is the only way you can get that attention...lol
As for a group being successful the Jonas brothers are successful because they are good at what they do at least to their fans they are. Since you are not a fan then of course you wouldn't like them.
As for my brain being too small or thick well what does it say about you to waste your precious time with ppl that have small brains...lol
Go get a real girlfriend and stop trying to get attention on line.
I don't think this whole discussion is about telling Jonas Brother fans to listen to something else.
I agree with you: taste is subjective. However there's two types of music I believe:
there's music that is just some mainstream crap that will disappear and be forgotten in a few years (jonas Brothers)
and then there's music that is actual Art.
Music is art after all like other arts, like painting, photography, cinema... I can probably draw a picture and it will be ok in it's execution. people might like it cause it's a nice drawing of a pony on a rainbow with some hearts around. but its nothing interesting, nothing new and it will not be art.
people can still disagree with what art is, but I think it is not purely subjective and pretty much everyone can agree on certain artists like for example in paintings artists like Van Gogh, Kandinsky, Vermeer, Rembrandt...
it's the same with music and the Jonas Brothers. people can listen to it and find it catchy or whatever they find in this music. but don't go out there and proclaim they are "artists" (people who make art) cause they are certainly not.
other musicians however make art and that is commonly acknowledged even though you might not like their music as such.
Great post!
shareidiotic hypocrite
you are saying how taste is subjective
and then you go off on how some things are art and some things arent
now i dont like the jonas brothers
but my friend does
and i dont say she has bad taste
she just has different taste
anyone who says anyone has "bad Taste" is a snob
and by the way, i find no aesthetic appeal in Kandinsky's art (but i am okay if you do)
also, on a similar subject, i have a passionate dislike for anyone who sats anything along the lines of
"Film is art
Theater is life
Television is a piece of furniture"
theyre usually snobs as well
Good tv tells a story better than a good movie
so according to your definition everything is art? and saying that something is art and something else isn't is being snob?
share[deleted]
idiotic hypocrite
you are saying how taste is subjective
and then you go off on how some things are art and some things arent
now i dont like the jonas brothers
but my friend does
and i dont say she has bad taste
she just has different taste
anyone who says anyone has "bad Taste" is a snob
and by the way, i find no aesthetic appeal in Kandinsky's art (but i am okay if you do)
also, on a similar subject, i have a passionate dislike for anyone who sats anything along the lines of
"Film is art
Theater is life
Television is a piece of furniture"
theyre usually snobs as well
Good tv tells a story better than a good movie
More than half of that proclamation was irrelevant to the entire discussion. I mean, Kandinsky? How did this discussion manage to branch off to that?
The worst time to have a heart attack is during charades - Demetri Martin
"Why does anyone have to explain to you why they like the music, who are you that you deserve an explanation. And you are such bull you are just here to put down ppl and you know it. If all you wanted to do was discuss music there are many other boards to do that on. THe fact that you choose this board and talk about how horrible the group is just proves your motive."
^That is one of the most IDIOTIC replies I have ever seen on these boards. No joke. You have no justification for that statement. People like NoseOfNicko and myself never put people down. If anything, its these defenseless fans that put US down, by saying we're stupid and jealous of The Jonas Brothers. It's so damn pathetic.
"Beneath this Mask, there is an Idea"
-V for Vendetta-
(Going OT from music for a quick second) Why should anyone care about what the rating of this movie is? I saw a preview for this movie on what I believe was some sort of morning talk show, and disgusted by the music AND the acting. Therefore, I believe this movie deserved a 1 (from what I saw). Don't bash other people's opinions, simple as that.
Oh, and lol at krisluvkev's stupid comment.
The worst time to have a heart attack is during charades - Demetri Martin
Great post Crazystacy.
But not all great music has to be 'Art'. I'd hardly call 'Take Me Home, Country Roads' art, but it's still a great song.
Contrary to popular belief, it is impossible to overdose on marijuana... though many have tried.
[deleted]