So you're saying that every well known band sucks?

I don't think Passion Pit sucks.
I don't think The Shins suck
I don't think Spoon sucks
I don't think Bright Eyes sucks.
Death Cab kinda sucks, but they're still better than the shit most people consider mainstream
I don't think My Bloody Valentine sucks
I don't think Band of Horses sucks
I don't think LCD Soundsystem sucks that much.
I don't think Grizzly Bear sucks
I don't think Diiv sucks
I don't think Massive Attack sucks
I don't think David Bowie sucks (he released an album recently too, and it wasn't bad)
I don't think Bloc Party sucks (although their last two albums weren't that good)
I don't think Stars sucks
I don't think Sleigh Bells sucks
I don't think MGMT sucks (that much)
I don't think Dr. Dog sucks
I don't think Animal Collective sucks
I don't think Sufjan Stevens sucks
I don't think The Strokes suck (although their last two albums weren't good)
I don't think Beck sucks
I don't think Jack White sucks
I don't think Edward Sharpe & The Magnetic Zeros suck
I don't think Deer Tick sucks
I don't think The Decemberists suck.
I don't think M. Ward sucks
I don't think Ok Go sucks
I don't think The Postal Service sucks (although the two new songs they're releasing are realllllllly bad)
I don't think Radiohead completely sucks
I don't think Tokyo Police Club sucks
I don't think Yeah Yeah Yeahs sucks


These are all pretty well known bands that pretty much fit under the same umbrella as Arcade Fire in relative 'known-ness'. Do they all suck because they're well known?


When I hear the word "mainstream" I think of the word "popularized" now read carefully. By "popularized" I don't mean "popular". I think of Top 40 as mainstream. I think of things like "Somebody That I Used To Know" or "Pumped Up Kicks" and the band Fun. as mainstream. Why? Because they pander to group of people that dictates what is mainstream.


I don't think of bands that become well known based mostly (key word mostly) on word of mouth. A lot of the bands I listed are mainstream, however they aren't all bad. So if by mainstream you mean "well known" when you're saying something like "Mainstream bad, underground good" then you're just a wannabe hipster piece of shit. It's not 2005 anymore. Anti-mainstreamness isn't cool. You can judge quality based on the music not based on how well known a band is.

Chuck Finster wrote:

I don't think Passion Pit sucks.
I don't think The Shins suck
I don't think Spoon sucks
I don't think Bright Eyes sucks.
Death Cab kinda sucks, but they're still better than the shit most people consider mainstream
I don't think My Bloody Valentine sucks
I don't think Band of Horses sucks
I don't think LCD Soundsystem sucks that much.
I don't think Grizzly Bear sucks
I don't think Diiv sucks
I don't think Massive Attack sucks
I don't think David Bowie sucks (he released an album recently too, and it wasn't bad)
I don't think Bloc Party sucks (although their last two albums weren't that good)
I don't think Stars sucks
I don't think Sleigh Bells sucks
I don't think MGMT sucks (that much)
I don't think Dr. Dog sucks
I don't think Animal Collective sucks
I don't think Sufjan Stevens sucks
I don't think The Strokes suck (although their last two albums weren't good)
I don't think Beck sucks
I don't think Jack White sucks
I don't think Edward Sharpe & The Magnetic Zeros suck
I don't think Deer Tick sucks
I don't think The Decemberists suck.
I don't think M. Ward sucks
I don't think Ok Go sucks
I don't think The Postal Service sucks (although the two new songs they're releasing are realllllllly bad)
I don't think Radiohead completely sucks
I don't think Tokyo Police Club sucks
I don't think Yeah Yeah Yeahs sucks


These are all pretty well known bands that pretty much fit under the same umbrella as Arcade Fire in relative 'known-ness'. Do they all suck because they're well known?


When I hear the word "mainstream" I think of the word "popularized" now read carefully. By "popularized" I don't mean "popular". I think of Top 40 as mainstream. I think of things like "Somebody That I Used To Know" or "Pumped Up Kicks" and the band Fun. as mainstream. Why? Because they pander to group of people that dictates what is mainstream.


I don't think of bands that become well known based mostly (key word mostly) on word of mouth. A lot of the bands I listed are mainstream, however they aren't all bad. So if by mainstream you mean "well known" when you're saying something like "Mainstream bad, underground good" then you're just a wannabe hipster piece of shit. It's not 2005 anymore. Anti-mainstreamness isn't cool. You can judge quality based on the music not based on how well known a band is.

I don't like a single artist from the list. It isn't my cup of tea. You try to prove your point with your own liking, which of course, wont work on me as I do not appreciate the same music.

And I've never said underground is good. Most of it sucks as well, but is not as bad as mainstream. It's just MY OPINION. What I am trying to point out is that music industry has massively collapsed in my eyes. Once again, I've never said there weren't exceptions. It was my general view on music today.

And you've pointed out line between mainstream and underground is blurred. That by itself implies I wont see mainstream the same way you do. For me, it's more than 40 songs on the charts.

I've never judged music on how well known it is. If you knew what music I like, you would notice it's pretty much mainstream of mid 70's to mid 90's. Call me stuck in the past, I really don't care. I was asked what I think of today's music. :D

---------- Post added at 10:36 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:25 AM ----------

Ari Gold wrote:

Why are people still discussing this?

This is fact:

Because not all people share the same opinion.
And who says music hasn't been garbage before?

Todays mainstream is, yes, but hasn't the majority of mainstream always been garbage? People today reflect on big name bands that are still liked from 20-30 years ago, but forget about all the crap Lionel Richie, Olivia Newton, Starship, etc put out there. Hell, Rick Astley is made fun of for how bad his music is with rickroll'd, yet never gets brought up when talking about the music of the 80s as opposed to now.

The problem is I think now is how easy it is to consistently hear bad music (mainstream/pop). Because 4 4 time signatures are great, right?

This.

Mainstream 70s to 90s sucked too though. You're honestly going to sit here and tell me that you loved pop stars of the 80s and disco of the 70s and boy bands of the 90s? If that's the case okay.

Post script: you don't have to like a band to acknowledge that their music isn't complete shit. Is the point I was attempting to make.

Post post script: I never said that mainstream is top 40. I'm saying that top 40 is a huge factor in mainstream. but okay.

Chuck Finster wrote:

Mainstream 70s to 90s sucked too though. You're honestly going to sit here and tell me that you loved pop stars of the 80s and disco of the 70s and boy bands of the 90s? If that's the case okay.

Post script: you don't have to like a band to acknowledge that their music isn't complete shit. Is the point I was attempting to make.

Post post script: I never said that mainstream is top 40. I'm saying that top 40 is a huge factor in mainstream. but okay.

Nah. It sucked bad as well, 90s weren't too bad though. Didn't say I liked those eras, but I liked few artists picked out of mainstream. You're misinterpreting what I am trying to point out, and that's I'm not a hater of mainstream.

In that case, fine. But let's be real, you're still trying to make a point using lots of examples of what you like. If you weren't, your examples would probably be Adele or Eminem, which, to be honest, I enjoy.

I didn't understand that part well, sorry.

In that case, fine. But let's be real, you're still trying to make a point using lots of examples of what you like. If you weren't, your examples would probably be Adele or Eminem, which, to be honest, I enjoy.

Uh. No. We were talking about Arcade Fire, and I pointed out bands that were relatively similar in knownness as Arcade Fire. Did you even read the rest of that post or did you just see the list and say "Wow those are all just bands you like".

Arcade Fire is NO WHERE NEAR as popular as Adele. Arcade Fire is NO WHERE NEAR as popular as Eminem. Like seriously. Read the entire post next time :rofl:

---------- Post added at 03:53 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:50 PM ----------



So then what exactly did you mean by "mainstream is bad." :confused:

So speaking of popularity, why do some people lose interest in a song when it becomes popular, or "mainstream." Not as in overplayed on the radio all the time, but when other people start checking it out and enjoying it? I would love to have a song i found that not popular be heard, so the artist can get some recognition. Anyone else with me?

Chuck Finster wrote:

Uh. No. We were talking about Arcade Fire, and I pointed out bands that were relatively similar in knownness as Arcade Fire. Did you even read the rest of that post or did you just see the list and say "Wow those are all just bands you like".

Arcade Fire is NO WHERE NEAR as popular as Adele. Arcade Fire is NO WHERE NEAR as popular as Eminem. Like seriously. Read the entire post next time :rofl:

---------- Post added at 03:53 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:50 PM ----------



So then what exactly did you mean by "mainstream is bad." :confused:

Yes, but you're the one to point out Arcade Fire. If you put one artist you like as a example, it's logical for me to think you're going to base your criticism on artists you like.

You were basically calling me a hipster douche, so I've pointed out two mainstream artists I think are very talented, not comparing them to Arcade Fire. Just to explain that I don't mean something going mainstream is bad. I think it's cool we have some talented artists in mainstream for a change!

I mean today mainstream has very limited choice of good artists, but has a pretty colorful choice of shitty ones. It's isn't just boy bands, or just shitty pop, it's all together plus shitty rap and shitty metal. Before, it was a one good and one or two shitty trends. Underground can't be good if mainstream sucks as bad as it does nowadays. They've got 0 inspiration to create good music and tons of reasons to create shitty. So music is shitty nowadays. Well, the positive side is that everyone will remember these times by gems in mainstream.

It's not an opinion, it's fact. You're just a moronic hipster.

They do because they're hipsters. They think they'll look even more cool if they were into cool stuff before everyone else, or shortly said, advanced somehow.
I would love that as well, and I'm trying to get people around me hear those great songs that they don't know. I don't understand why people have such a resistance to underground. Perhaps that is because of hipsters.

But you're a hipster.

Ari Gold wrote:

It's not an opinion, it's fact. You're just a moronic hipster.

And you're a douchebag, clearly you have no other arguments so you have to go with an insult.

---------- Post added at 09:14 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:14 PM ----------

Ari Gold wrote:

But you're a hipster.

Still better than being a douche.

Douche bags > Hipsters.

Ari Gold wrote:

Douche bags > Hipsters.

This is stupid, we're not going anywhere.

It can be a fact hundred times, people are never going to admit it. That's where I'm going.

This statement completely contradicts your original statement.

I mean today mainstream has very limited choice of good artists, but has a pretty colorful choice of shitty ones. It's isn't just boy bands, or just shitty pop, it's all together plus shitty rap and shitty metal. Before, it was a one good and one or two shitty trends. Underground can't be good if mainstream sucks as bad as it does nowadays. They've got 0 inspiration to create good music and tons of reasons to create shitty. So music is shitty nowadays. Well, the positive side is that everyone will remember these times by gems in mainstream.

Were you even alive "before". You literally have no clue how much shitty pop music was around in the 70s-90s because you weren't there... you can't say "for every 2 shitty bands there was one non shitty band" because that's just not true. There was just as much shit in the 70s-90s as there is today.

The underground doesn't draw inspiration from the mainstream... That's kind of the point of the underground. It's supposed to be different. You make literally no sense.

---------- Post added at 06:45 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:41 PM ----------

Postscript: most hipster douches like Adele and Eminem too. Don't think you're original. A hipster in 2013 is not the same thing as a hipster from 2000-2008. In 2000-2008 you had to swear that everything that was popular was horrible or lose your "hipster cred". In 2013 you have to have extremely wide-ranged music taste and actually know something about music or else lose your "hipster cred". You're not a hipster. You don't deserve that title. Hipsters know what they're talking about.

Chuck Finster wrote:

This statement completely contradicts your original statement.



Were you even alive "before". You literally have no clue how much shitty pop music was around in the 70s-90s because you weren't there... you can't say "for every 2 shitty bands there was one non shitty band" because that's just not true. There was just as much shit in the 70s-90s as there is today.

The underground doesn't draw inspiration from the mainstream... That's kind of the point of the underground. It's supposed to be different. You make literally no sense.

---------- Post added at 06:45 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:41 PM ----------

Postscript: most hipster douches like Adele and Eminem too. Don't think you're original. A hipster in 2013 is not the same thing as a hipster from 2000-2008. In 2000-2008 you had to swear that everything that was popular was horrible or lose your "hipster cred". In 2013 you have to have extremely wide-ranged music taste and actually know something about music or else lose your "hipster cred". You're not a hipster. You don't deserve that title. Hipsters know what they're talking about.

Can you not read? It was opinion on music today in general.

It has to draw the inspiration from somewhere, and that's likely to be other music. That can be either mainstream of today's or from before. You must be deaf if you can't hear it. Plus, lots of underground (always was, but especially today because money is more important than ever) is wannabe mainstream shit.

No, I'm not saying for every bad band there was a good band. Some trends have much more followers than the other ones. Just, please. And then you will say how I don't read your posts. :rofl:
And you know, there's thing called Youtube, and it's not like it was thousand years ago that people who've listened to it died a long time ago. Or you don't speak to anyone who is not teen?

It seems like you're the one who has no idea what they're talking about. You just put some random sentences that have nothing to do with my post, hence you still don't get what I'm trying to say.

I'm not even going to argue anymore. I don't want more lessons on how my opinion is wrong and yours is right. If I say today's music sucks, it sucks to me. Nobody said you shouldn't listen to it, nobody said you have to find it horrible, and last, nobody was comparing it to the old music before you brought it up.

10 examples. Please.

No, I'm not saying for every bad band there was a good band. Some trends have much more followers than the other ones. Just, please. And then you will say how I don't read your posts. :rofl:

I misread. There's a difference between misreading and not reading. Muh bad calm yuh shit.

And you know, there's thing called Youtube, and it's not like it was thousand years ago that people who've listened to it died a long time ago. Or you don't speak to anyone who is not teen?

And every single song from the 70s 80s and 90s is on youtube? You are aware that the only reason old music gets put on youtube is because other people put it on there right? and that like... because there are people putting it on there and it's not like spotify or something where they just put everything on there the majority of the stuff you see on youtube is going to be the good stuff from the 70s 80s and 90s. You're funny.

It seems like you're the one who has no idea what they're talking about. You just put some random sentences that have nothing to do with my post, hence you still don't get what I'm trying to say.

What exactly is it that you're trying to say? You originally said "mainstream sucks. underground is soso" which was a pretty sweeping generalization. Then you completely contradicted that statement saying something like "not all mainstream sucks. and underground only sucks because they can't draw inspiration from the mainstream" which literally makes no sense.

Would you say that Animal Collective or The Books draw inspiration from the mainstream? Please inform me of mainstream bands in the past that sound like this. PLEASE. I would love to hear them.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qy83S5RkF04]We Tigers - YouTube[/ame]

[ame='http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZHNArEfBKdc']the books - smells like content - YouTube[/ame]

[ame='http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oyJ2KLv8bQo']Dangerous Cans - Feel Something - YouTube[/ame]


(edit - I guess I should explain in advanced detail why I posted these video since you seem to get upset whenever I do something like this even though the reason should be obvious: You said that underground bands draw inspiration from mainstream bands. So I would just like to know what mainstream artists these "underground" artists pull inspiration from.)

postscript: I never claimed to know what I was talking about, as I'm not a hipster douche bag. :rofl:

I'm not even going to argue anymore. I don't want more lessons on how my opinion is wrong and yours is right. If I say today's music sucks, it sucks to me. Nobody said you shouldn't listen to it, nobody said you have to find it horrible, and last, nobody was comparing it to the old music before you brought it up.

I never said your opinion was wrong. You can debate opinions though. I'm pretty sure you brought up "mainstream from the 70s 80s and 90s" I could be wrong :rolleyes:

---------- Post added at 08:41 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:29 AM ----------

I don't understand why people get all "it's just my opinion" when I start debating their opinion. It's like... opinions are, in fact, debatable.

There are some songs I like from the radio in such, but not many. Most of the music, like you said, seems to be repetitive and frankly, a lot of it feels very artificial, and not just the singing. Like the topics themselves...

And I love a good love song.

But could we please sing about something else?

Edit: I do like today's rock, though, and there are some good things outside of pop in general. I was talking about the popular radio stations up there, mainly. Anyone like Imagine Dragons?