Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Will we ever run out of new Music?

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,328 ✭✭✭karaokeman


    While I would agree everything has influences, and nothing is completely original I do believe there is still room for innovation in music despite what the man who made this video is saying.

    I think similarities within the realm of pop are much more inevitable because so many commercial tracks use the same basic melodies. If an artist is not willing to challenge those safe boundaries of compression their music won't achieve anything groundbreaking.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,182 ✭✭✭nyarlothothep


    His argument runs into a problem in the respect that yes, you can play a chord progression that's been used in many famous songs, but the formula, the mathematical formula alone doesn't account for why the song is good. Example, if you play D to A to B to G you have, if I remember correctly the chord progression to with or without you by U2, which has been used in lots of other famous songs. So does that alone make the song enjoyable? No. Sing a melody along to it. Is the melody necessarily good enough to elevate the song above the formula used? Not necessarily. Ok what else to add, production? Will that elevate the song, again not necessarily. There is that which cannot be measured/quantified in the production of great art, that goes against the current positivist dogma of our current society. It's platonic reception/interpretation, there isn't really a limit to that because it's not a physical property in the first place, it's subjective experience. That doesn't mean spiritual either. It's interesting that subjective experiences can display a pattern of consensus among a large swathe of people with regards to 'classic' pieces of music though.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,466 ✭✭✭Blisterman


    I think there is a sweet spot with regards to how far from the norm that a song can go.

    Too similar to existing styles of music, and they seem stale and uninteresting.

    Too different, and it sounds horrible and unmusical to most people's tastes.

    And this sweet spot is different for everyone. Some people may relish hearing unusual and distinctive music. Some people are completely closed off to anything that's not very similar to the music they're used to.

    But of course, times this gradual pushing of the envelope, and over time music as a whole changes. Compare today's music to that of 100 years ago. Though some elements remain common, the rhythms, timbre, melodies are completely different.

    Looking at it on a decade by decade basis, you can see quite clearly how it evolved.


  • Site Banned Posts: 224 ✭✭SubBusted


    Blisterman wrote: »
    But of course, times this gradual pushing of the envelope, and over time music as a whole changes. Compare today's music to that of 100 years ago. Though some elements remain common, the rhythms, timbre, melodies are completely different.
    This is from 1912 and is better than anything new I've heard this year.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,109 ✭✭✭Technocentral


    No.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement