Why does /mu/ hate everything mainstream? What mainstream artists does /mu/ like? Serious question, thanks.
Kanye West
Grimes
Chvrches
Slint
Beach Boys
Good number
>>60712244
Lots of very mainstream rappers and R&B artists, for one. Kendrick, Young Thug, D'Angelo, Outkast, stuff like that
/mu/ doesn't dislike shit BECAUSE it's mainstream, it's just that a lot of mainstream music has a "lowest common denominator" sound to it for the sake of sales. lots of mainstream music is good, too
>>60712244
It's not 2009 anymore, /mu/ is not hipster anmyore, now they are poptimist which is even worse
>>60712260
Slint isnt mainstream
>>60712433
Kill yourself
I personally dislike most mainstream music because it tries to appeal to so many people it sounds disenguine. Also I relate more to poor musicians
>>60712474
One day I will, not yet though
>>60712295
Actually almost everything /mu/ listens to is just top 40 music that was promoted through Pitchfork and Fantano instead of Rolling Stones or Billboard. Still the same shit. It has absolutely nothing to do with the sound of the music - you are the lowest common denominator yourself.
Why the fuck did a pic of a lumberjack with a small lunch make me feel?
>>60712433
nice blogpost faggot
It's not because they hate mainstream artists, it's because most of the time those artists have low artistic merits, and also because popularity exposes a wider range of reactions from a community.
>>60712481
>disenguine
rifl "muh genuinity" get over yourself, the vast majority of music that is released is so to get sold. Otherwise it wouldn't be recorded and released in a format and on a label that made it accessible for you to find.
But please humour me, come with some examples of music you listen to that is "genuine" and "not released to make money"
What's stopping me from stealing someone's riff and then putting it in a constant loop and I just reverb the fuck out of it and feed it plugins until it sounds like popcorn in the microwave and then I just record myself screaming and layer it 3 minutes in and finish "my song" and then I photoshop a picture of wooden baby blocks next to a pyramid and slap a name on it like "nutseed library" and then I keep doing this until you faggots find my shit and start eating it up
>>60712244
>Why does /mu/ hate everything mainstream?
Are we on the same board?
>>60712541
>what is vaporwave
>>60712559
it's done for sheeps and people uncapable of admiring artistic performances
>>60712615
Artistic performances like your Death Grips amirite?
God, these threads are always the most fun on /mu/ when you keep in mind what's ALWAYS on the front page.
>>60712639
Why did you come back and expect it to be different or better?
For me
As for modern stuff
Queens of the Stone Age
Kendrick Lamar
Mainstream at it's release
TuPac
A lot of 90s rap, actually
The Cure
Deep Purple
Green Day before the 2000s
A lot of other stuff in those genres, but those are the mainstays
>>60712664
I didn't.
>newfriends on /mu/ ACTUALLY think this place has elevated tastes because they swapped Billboard for /mu/core
This is /cringe/
>>60712639
>Death Grips
what's fallacious with that? don't give me any meme replies, he's experimental and at least brings some new substance to the table, unlike other he isn't the lowest common denominator
>>60712639
that was obviously memeing, are you really that dense faggot?
>>60712541
No one said music isn't released to be sold, but a lot of music is released with no intentions of being sold to the average American consumer. These are artists who would rather make their name famous in a niche area of music (often times by being experimental and innovative) rather than pander to the mainstream media and take up 0.1% of a multi-billion dollar pop/rock industry (often times by following what everyone else does).
>>60712541
>implying those are mutually exclusive, or implying he implied that
>implying its black and white, or implying he implied that
then again yeah he probably kinda implied that so whatever
>>60712714
Then why is 99% of the board about the mass-consumption shite?
Kanye, James Blake and maybe Grimes or Bon Iver is all I can think of in terms of current mainstream
/mu/ is a place for egotistical pretentious hipsters to gather around and throw around memes of NMH's "Aeroplane Over the Sea" album cover and pretend that they don't love the "plebian" music that once used to be "so undergroud" or "so lo-fi" or "so raw".
That's the fucking problem with this place. It attempts to classify ever single possible genre in which a band or piece of music could be classified into, then proceeds to create stigmas based on these types of music.
Now I'm not one to say that I enjoy mainstream music either. It's contrived and mindless and should not be considered art by any means, but this shit's gotten fucking ridiculous, /mu/.
While all of you fawn over the "underground" culture that has been constructed by the interwebs, what you're really doing is taking all the music that is held so hallowed and "primo" and perpetuating it into an endless cycle.
1). The music (let's say Death Grips for example) is taken and perpetuated on /mu/ for being "raw" and "innovative" and "engaging".
2) Then pretentious hipster fucks like Anthony Fantano (that knows absolutely nothing about musical composition or what it means to be a musician) make a video review of the music; Thereby either upholding it as musical "genius" or shit.
3). The cyclical hipster wheel then comes full circle back to /mu/ where it is shared further and fawned over some more.
Eventually, the music you once fawned over becomes popular because of the permeating nature of online media, and what do you do? You stop listening to it because it becomes part of "the mainstream".
Essentially, fuck you /mu/. You're a paradoxical message board that defeats itself with every post.
>>60712695
>released on EMI or Sony
>not for commercial purposes
lmfaeo good post
>>60712696
>jokes on you I was only pretending to be retarded
>>60712714
Again, humour me and post some music you listen to that doesn't pander to its audience and is released with the intention of being sold. Something that you for whatever reason thinks has "muh artistic integrity".
>>60712738
He kind of heavily implied that.
>>60712244
>Why does /mu/ hate everything mainstream?
Not true.
/mu/ loves The Swans who are a Top 40 band.
>>60712695
>he
>>60712764
OMG it's almost like institutions bond over their intersubjective ideas and ideals, and reinforce these through continued discussion about them MINDBLOWING
99% of it isn't. 99% of these artists are not playing on the radio right now.
>>60712764
>/mu/ is one person
kek
>>60712244
neo-/mu/ is 70% popitmists now
>>60712776
This is one bitter faggot lmao
All these on the board RIGHT NOW are mainstream.
>>60712818
This too.
>>60712850
>sonic youth
>mainstream
>>60712764
/mu/ doesn't say anything positive about NMH or Death Grips any more, and Fantano gets tons of shit here. Same with Pitchfork.
>>60712244
Because there is no good mainstream music
>>60712776
There's a difference between pandering to a certain audience and attempting to pander to everyone with a pulse.
>>60712872
They are one of the major rock bands of the 90s.
Do you live under a rock in a field in Idaho?
I've got 3 terabytes of 60's pre-ambient
800 gigs of live recordings of this local band called the fuckerfucks. They played only 2 shows before breaking up but I had 11 redundant recording rigs all recording flac which I then layered over one another for 25,000 kbps bitrate.
8 terabytes of the beatles. No not THOSE beatles, the new beatles. They haven't recorded an album yet and technically they're not really a band yet but they're indie-gospel-post-funk-punk style is going to be huge when you guys hear their stuff in about 5 years.
4 petabytes of the Ethiopian Free Jazz wave that occurred in 1973 in a town called Wenji Gefersi.
18 terabytes of sound check recordings from the mid 90's band LFO. They only scored a hit with "I like girls (who wear abercrombie and fitch)" but they were way ahead of their time.
That's just my C: drive. I have 41 drives.
>>60712880
Nope, not really.
>>60712872
Sonic Youth is entry-level 8th grader alt rock these days, they're very acclaimed and popular
>>60712872
You fucking kidding me? Sonic Youth are very well known, stupid faggot.
>>60712850
agreed, besides lil ugly mane. popular is not the same as mainstream.
>>60712872
literally over a million listeners on last.fm alone, and they were on a major label
>>60712900
Well if you don't hear the difference between what Avicii's doing and what James Ferraro or some shit is trying to do then that's fine. Or the Residents vs. The Eagles, maybe
>>60712919
Well OP did say ''Why does /mu/ hate everything mainstream? What mainstream artists does /mu/ like?''
>>60712929
I hear that they sound differently, but what does either say about "muh artistic integrity"? Nothing at all -- pandering is pandering.
>>60712776
From this year alone:
>Viet Cong
>Kamasi Washington
>Elza Soares
>Oneohtrix Point Never
>Milo
>Lil Ugly Mane
>>60712900
At this point you're not even trying. Don't come here and ask questions if all you're going to be is act stubborn when backed into a corner.
>>60712945
I'm not the guy you were replying to, but I doubt The Residents were ever too concerned with reaching a wide audience and moving lots of records off the shelf. Not that I really care whether an artist is or not, I think plenty of forward thinking pop music gets released with the intention of appealing to a mass audience. But there's a limit to how off-the-wall something can be if you want it to be well received or even noticed by most people.
>>60712764
>You're a paradoxical message board that defeats itself with every post.
especially seeing how commonplace "i'm not like the other /mu/tants"-type posts like this are
>>60712972
Could you make it any less obvious that you're a Pitchfork drone?
>>60712972
this has to be bait lmao
>>60712945
Are you able to see a difference in influence substance between films, books, or video games?
>>60712244
That guy looks kinda like Heavy from TF2
>>60713028
>>60713032
I haven't used Pitchfork in years, these are the most influential artists of 2015.
Just because Pitchfork covers most popular underground artists doesn't mean every artist in Pitchfork (including your favorite ones) are p4kcore.
>>60713090
>these are the most influential artists of 2015.
lol
>>60712972
This entire list is bait.
>>60712998
Good post.
>>60713010
You may doubt it as much as you want; in my eyes they pandered to a specific demographic and released a bunch of albums to get them sold. It's not like they wrote a grand opera and only performed it live: they recorded music, put it in shelves and had people buy it. When some people did, they kept releasing music that they knew people would cop.
>>60713051
I'm not following you.
>>60713090
my fucking sides kekekek
you need to expand your horizons 2bh
beach house
title fight
bjork
chelsea wolfe
converge
a bunch of disbanded/deceased bands and artists
it's more the profit motive that i have a bias against than just being super popular.
>>60713118
>every answer is dismissive and doesn't encourage discussion
Surprise surprise.
>>60712776
>post some music you listen to that doesn't pander to its audience and is released with the intention of being sold
eriKm, Martin Tetreault, Jerome Neotinger, Evil Nine
>>60712244
are you kididng /mu/ loves mainstream stuff
>>60713118
But that didn't stop them from making the music they wanted to make, though, clearly, as they never compromised their sound to appeal to more people.
This may sound fedora tier, but I don't listening to music that basic white bitches listen to, SORRY for being honest
>>60713150
Every artist that has ever put a price tag on their music has done it out of a profit motive.
>>60713182
To.
Bed.
>>60713185
You don't know that. They still made music with a price tag on it, ie., they had a for-profit motive.
>>60713146
I didn't list other artists like tetema, Colin Stetson, Thy Catafalque, Remmirath, etc. because then I'd be accused of trying too hard.
Make your own list.
>>60713182
only Poptimists like mainstream, some of us real niggas still roll underground and hustle hard unlike u
>>60713196
Not true for literally all the artists on bandcamp right now who give people the option to either download for free or paying what they feel like the album is worth.
You are so out of touch with what you're trying to talk about.
>>60713225
Yes, but their audience was a very specific set of people. It's not about the "profit motive," it's about whether or not they're going out of their way to make something people will like and market their shit as such. The strategies of Kenny G and some Chicago DJ in getting their music out are going to be very different, and the writing of the music is influenced by the intended audience
>>60713090
Who exactly have they influenced? Viet Cong is just part of the trend of generic post-punk revivalists, as are most of those artists in their respective genres (besides OPN).
>>60713273
>Not true for literally all the artists on bandcamp right now who give people the option to either download for free or paying what they feel like the album is worth.
Then they're not really putting a price tag on it, are they? Also bandcamp artists are like the most pandering demographic of musicians in the entire world lmfao
>>60713279
Yep, you said it yourself: the music is influenced by the intended audience. It doesn't matter what audience you're targeting, you're always pandering when you try to sell music.
>>60713109
Make a list.
>>60713196
true but there's usually a greater incentive coming from their desire to be a part of music. i'm talking about artists who hugely compromise or completely eradicate their integrity so that more people will catch on to the surface level of their work and they'll make more money.
>>60713333
And if the intended audience is people who don't really like music, then it follows that people who have more than a passing interest in music won't like it. Fast food is intended for easy, cheap consumption and is made to appeal to the sensibilities of the majority with more thought put into profit than into delivering a quality product. Again, I'm not saying all popular music is like this. Not at all. But it happens.
>>60713374
>i'm talking about artists who hugely compromise or completely eradicate their integrity so that more people will catch on to the surface level of their work and they'll make more money.
For all you know, AVICII loves making the music he does, and has never compromised a thing. This is most likely true. Making a shit ton of money is a byproduct of this. This is likely true for as many mainstream artists as it is bedroom recorders.
>>60712781
Fucking dropped
>>60713408
>then it follows that people who have more than a passing interest in music won't like it
Ah the old "I like music so I listen to more of it and therefore am better than the plebes". Do you know how much music people listen to? Do you have ANY citation that would show a correlation between time spent listening to music and music they listen to?
See >>60713420
>>60713420
It's still largely a product intended for entertainment. It's not pure art; it's mainly functional.
>>60713461
I never said or implied that, but most of the people I know don't really spend any of their free time listening to music and only put it on when they're working or driving. I'm the same way with film- I hardly ever watch anything so I can't claim to knew much about what's going on in film or who's the most creative or interesting director. Nothing about being better than anybody. And Avicii clearly doesn't have any interest in creating a unique or distinct product.
>>60713509
Just like [ALL THE MUSIC YOU LISTEN TO HERE]
>>60713333
>Then they're not putting a pricetag on it
Allowing people to pay their price for your music is putting a price tag on it. It's whatever price you feel it's worth.
You've moved so far on from the original topic: a hefty chunk of mainstream pop artists (not all) are trying to mimic the flavor of the month sound in hopes of acquiring just 1% of 1% of the massive multi-billion dollar mainstream music industry. Trying to sell as many records as humanly possible is the definition of pandering.
If attempting to make any money at all even if it's just a tiny bit and you're catering your fanbase by putting out free shit all the time is considering pandering to you, then you don't know what the definition of pandering means. I'm still curious as to whether you think all books, films, TV shows, and video games are the exact same in terms of substance.
>>60713553
>>60713553
>>60713553
/argument
>>60713547
I'm about 99% certain you only listen to music while doing something else, such as browsing /mu/. You're no better than those other plebes you condemn.
>And Avicii clearly doesn't have any interest in creating a unique or distinct product.
Why would he? He's making music he loves, not trying hard to make something different. If your only goal is to make something different, isn't that less of artistic integrity than making music you love?
What's wrong with Avicii,?Seriously?
>>60713592
Well I generally don't, but that's neither here nor there. I would assert that if you loved music as an art you'd try to make an at least mildly interesting product.
>>60713635
Just a name I threw out because a friend was playing his music in the car the other day and it struck me as boring and generic. Nothing against his music, really, sorry if people on /mu/ like it or something.
>>60713673
>I would assert that if you loved music as an art you'd try to make an at least mildly interesting product.
Why? There's literally no reason for this. Also other people find AVICII's product interesting, it's just your interpretation that it isn't.
>>60713673
>if you loved music as an art you'd try to make an at least mildly interesting product.
Avicii is more interesting than Talk Talk.
Prove me wrong.
>>60713699
Sure, and my uncle finds Kenny G interesting, I guess it all just comes down to interpretation. I know people that live off of instant rice and mac and cheese every day, but I doubt they'd say it was necessarily good food.
>>60713724
>>60713699
>>60713673
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vlnw9LxxfTg
Avicii is nice and unique
>>60713742
I also doubt anyone who listened to AVICII would liken it to instant rice and mac and cheese, or even more so, that people who live off of instant rice and mac and cheese do so out of aesthetic preferences like the people who listen to AVICII.
>>60713851
COMPLETELY BTFO >>60713742
I'm trying hard to find an article or interview from about 2013 when Lil Wayne was about to put out I'm Not A Human Being 2. He himself said that he didn't like it. It went on to sell about half a million copies. I think that's the ultimate definition of pandering to your audience -- putting out shit that you don't even like just because you are guaranteed to turn a profit.
Why doesn't /mu/ like anything not mainstream? What non-mainstream artists does /mu/ like? Serious question, thanks.
>>60712320
>Slint isnt mainstream
topkek
>>60712504
>/mu/core "in the top 40"
are you kdding me? with the exceptions of a few, /mu/core is almost exclusively outside that top 40. Are you really going to tell me that NMH or Death Grips are in the top 40? Not to say that most /mu/core isn't overhyped or from p4k, but implying that it's top 40 is just bogus and ridiculous.
>>60714555
Most of these are chart topping critically acclaimed babbies first I'm really into music -core
>>60712818
>>60714555
>what is nirvana
>what is sonic youth
they're all top 40
>>60714491
saint isn't mainstream wtf
>>60712553
nothing
why don't you do it
bet you won't
pussy
>>60714667
>saint
slint you goddamn retard
>>60712320
>slint isn't mainstream
>one of the most accessible and entry-level post-rock that is widely known for its influences
you MUST be underage or b8ing
>>60716060
Yes, very well known under music enthousiasts.
accessible =/= mainstream
>>60714491
>>60716060
I think OP meant mainstream as in actual top40, radio stuff. Yeah Slint is pretty well known for their genre, but you can't go buy Spiderland at Urban Outfitters
>>60712260
>>60716060
>slint is mainstream
Wtf
Do you have a mental disability? If I were to ask 100 people in public if they knew who slint was, how much of them do you think would actually know them? Probably around 5
>>60712541
Boulez, Schoenberg, the list goes on...
>>60716930
made to appeal to academia
>>60717057
Schoenberg was ahead of academia when he began writing atonal/12-tone music.
black sabbath
pink floyd
king crimson
yes
genesis
talking heads
iggy pop/stooges
velvet underground
just off the top of my head, I think most people would be familiar with most if not all of those, or at least have heard of them
