# Should pop music be taxed - and, if so, at what rate?



## Johann Sebastian Bach (Dec 18, 2015)

Some of my friends call me a musical snob - it may well be true.

I certainly have a dislike for almost all pop music - largely because it's vacuous trash and also because those who perform it are frequently lacking talent (compared with classical instrumentalists and singers).
I also dislike the hype and massive amounts of money raised by the industry.

During a recent rant, I suggested all pop music should be taxed in order to give classical music a better chance of surviving. Now I've calmed down a little, it still seems a good idea.

What do you think?


----------



## Dr Johnson (Jun 26, 2015)

Definitely not.


----------



## Boldertism (May 21, 2015)

I'm against the weaponization of taxes. So no.


----------



## Guest (Jun 9, 2016)

I dislike football and think it should be taxed to support the baking industry. I love cakes.


----------



## clavichorder (May 2, 2011)

That is pretty funny!


----------



## Sloe (May 9, 2014)

There already is a sales tax and classical music is heavily subsidized.
Here the sales tax for records is 25 % for entry tickets to performances it is 6 % except if you are dancing then it is 25 %.
Personally I am against indirect taxes since they are regressive.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

Johann Sebastian Bach said:


> Some of my friends call me a musical snob - it may well be true.
> 
> I certainly have a dislike for almost all pop music - largely because it's vacuous trash and also because those who perform it are frequently lacking talent (compared with classical instrumentalists and singers).
> I also dislike the hype and massive amounts of money raised by the industry.
> ...


I favor fewer taxes. You obviously haven't sufficiently calmed down.


----------



## CDs (May 2, 2016)

Isn't it already taxed when you buy a CD, concert ticket, or merchandise?
Classical music can survive by going to performances, buying CDs and introducing others to it.


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

Johann Sebastian Bach said:


> Some of my friends call me a musical snob - it may well be true.
> 
> I certainly have a dislike for almost all pop music - largely because it's vacuous trash and also because those who perform it are frequently lacking talent (compared with classical instrumentalists and singers).
> I also dislike the hype and massive amounts of money raised by the industry.
> ...


Better yet, why not restore the aristocracy and let them pay for classical music like they used to, or they could just make popular music illegal.


----------



## Guest (Jun 9, 2016)

Taxation based on vindictiveness? The UK state already supports "the arts." Jeez my tax is paying for opera! AAAAAggggghhhhhh...


----------



## Guest (Jun 9, 2016)

Nereffid said:


> Better yet, why not restore the aristocracy and let them pay for classical music like they used to, or they could just make popular music illegal.


Restore them? Lucky you, we've still got the parasites.


----------



## Blancrocher (Jul 6, 2013)

My main concern about your proposal is the resultant endless legal wrangling over whether Philip Glass' film music is classical or not. However, I could probably be persuaded to support tariffs on the pop music of other nations, at least.


----------



## Guest (Jun 9, 2016)

Blancrocher said:


> I could probably be persuaded to support tariffs on the pop music of other nations, at least. My only worry is endless legal wrangling over whether Philip Glass' film music is classical or not.


Depends if it's atonal or not.


----------



## GreenMamba (Oct 14, 2012)

dogen said:


> Depends if it's atonal or not.


Of course he's atonal. He's Modern. He's just as atonal as Britten, Shostakovich, Roy Harris, and all those others.


----------



## Guest (Jun 9, 2016)

So not taxed then.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Johann Sebastian Bach said:


> During a recent rant, I suggested all pop music should be taxed in order to give classical music a better chance of surviving. Now I've calmed down a little, it still seems a good idea.
> 
> What do you think?


How do you think the big record companies can afford to have classical music subsidiaries? They finance them with the revenue streams created by all the "trashy" pop artists signed to their labels.


----------



## Triplets (Sep 4, 2014)

I agree with the OP. Tax the Ignorant ********. And any one that plays Justin Bieber in public automatically gets the death penalty with no chance of reprieve


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

Johann Sebastian Bach said:


> Should pop music be taxed


No .


----------



## TurnaboutVox (Sep 22, 2013)

Johann Sebastian Bach said:


> Some of my friends call me a musical snob - it may well be true.
> 
> I certainly have a dislike for almost all pop music - largely because it's vacuous trash and also because those who perform it are frequently lacking talent


Do you really dislike all popular music, Herr Bach? That's a pretty wide spread of styles, genres, periods and cultures to condemn as vacuous trash. Has there been no point in your life when something in popular music has captured your imagination? If not, I wonder why not.

Pop music isn't all manufactured artists and bands - there's a lot of talent and imagination and passion gone into a lot of popular music.

Personally I can't imagine what life would have been like without a love of loud, dissonant rock music in my teens (and the bonding with other teens that came with it) or jazz, or folk music at different times in my life.

It's all music. Classical music has no monopoly on musical merit, I think.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

Pop music, and my personal evolution.

I loved pop as a child.
Then I loved it as an adolescent.
Then I matured and loved it as a young adult.
Then I matured further and loved it in middle age.
Now I am fully grown into geezerhood, and like it maybe even more.

I like Bach also.


----------



## Figleaf (Jun 10, 2014)

dogen said:


> Taxation based on vindictiveness? The UK state already supports "the arts." Jeez my tax is paying for opera! AAAAAggggghhhhhh...


Yes, but it would be easy to recoup all that and more with a tax on bad operatic performance practices. Even the equivalent of a swear jar would raise a fair bit from penalising wobbles, shouting, intrusive aitches, grotesque degrees of larynx lowering, Regie stagings, voiceless pipsqueaks inexplicably cast as Otello or Lohengrin, etc etc. In fact before you know it, opera performances would either become a net contributor to the economy or cease to exist altogether. Either way, job done!


----------



## Chronochromie (May 17, 2014)

I don't know what is meant by "pop music" here, as some here interpret it as all non-classical music. Either way, no.


----------



## Xenakiboy (May 8, 2016)

If you mean modern pop music, as in the genre?

Well I don't think it should be taxed but should it really be *everywhere* you go? I find it irritating. I don't listen to radio or watch TV and it's still *everywhere*, it's enough to drive you insane.


----------



## regenmusic (Oct 23, 2014)

Nereffid said:


> Better yet, why not restore the aristocracy and let them pay for classical music like they used to, or they could just make popular music illegal.


Yes, I demand to be restored to my proper estate.


----------



## Sloe (May 9, 2014)

Xenakiboy said:


> If you mean modern pop music, as in the genre?
> 
> Well I don't think it should be taxed but should it really be *everywhere* you go? I find it irritating. I don't listen to radio or watch TV and it's still *everywhere*, it's enough to drive you insane.


I have lost all contact with pop music.


----------



## Xenakiboy (May 8, 2016)

Sloe said:


> I have lost all contact with pop music.


I envy you then!


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

Xenakiboy said:


> I envy you then!


I feel so weak and inferior. Maybe I need a 12-step program.


----------



## Iean (Nov 17, 2015)

If pop music is taxed because its "trashy", what about trashy classical recordings and snore-inducing opera performances?


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

Johann Sebastian Bach said:


> Some of my friends call me a musical snob - it may well be true.
> 
> I certainly have a dislike for almost all pop music - largely because it's vacuous trash and also because those who perform it are frequently lacking talent (compared with classical instrumentalists and singers).
> I also dislike the hype and massive amounts of money raised by the industry.
> ...


Before I answer whether it should be taxed or not, what do you mean by taxing music? How? We pay taxes on recordings, CDs anyway. Is that what you mean?


----------



## Blancrocher (Jul 6, 2013)

Chronochromie said:


> I don't know what is meant by "pop music" here, as some here interpret it as all non-classical music. Either way, no.


I believe that the point was that we should shoot music, though that's a bit of an extreme measure if you ask me.


----------



## Casebearer (Jan 19, 2016)

Taxes are only of government concern in areas of massive addiction in the taxable population. I suppose internet, robots (dancing or not) or even diapers are higher on the list of next-taxable thing...


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Most pop music rots the mind. Therefore it is only right to tax it to compensate for the toll it takes on society. The money can be spent on education for people who are right thinking (e.g., classical music lovers).


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Iean said:


> If pop music is taxed because its "trashy", what about trashy classical recordings and snore-inducing opera performances?


Cross-over tax! Cross-over tax!


----------



## Chronochromie (May 17, 2014)

Florestan said:


> Most pop music rots the mind. Therefore it is only right to tax it to compensate for the toll it takes on society. The money can be spent on education for people who are right thinking (e.g., classical music lovers).


Yet another instance of Poe's law...


----------



## isorhythm (Jan 2, 2015)

No, pop music is good.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

isorhythm said:


> No, pop music is good.


Just a comma away from truth:

No pop music is good.

(To avoid another incident of Poe's Law, I hereby add )


----------



## Guest (Jun 10, 2016)

Well I've learned one thing here; Poe's Law. I abhor this Law. It is anathema to me and all right-thinking reactionary elitist bigots.


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

Taxing one thing to pay for another opens up too many cans of worms. How do you decide? You might as well tax Donald Trump to pay for Bernie Sanders' campaign . . . Oh, wait, that's not a bad idea!


----------



## Blancrocher (Jul 6, 2013)

Even if we don't increase taxes on popular music cds, I'm sure that many of us can agree that there should be a taxes or fees for playing popular music in public spaces, malls, and most businesses. Perhaps also fines for people in cars playing pop music with any windows open in residential neighborhoods.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Blancrocher said:


> Even if we don't increase taxes on popular music cds, I'm sure that many of us can agree that there should be a taxes or fees for playing popular music in public spaces, malls, and most businesses.


I am sick of that rot being piped into just about every store I go in. I wear earbuds to block it and that works pretty nicely, but the best would be classical instrumental. Who can object to that except maybe some dope head who can't live without constant head banging punk music or such.

Furthermore () forget taxing pop music. Just outlaw it!


----------



## Dr Johnson (Jun 26, 2015)

Blancrocher said:


> Even if we don't increase taxes on popular music cds, I'm sure that many of us can agree that there should be a taxes or *fees for playing popular music in public spaces, malls, and most businesses.* Perhaps also cars playing pop music with any windows open.


In the UK the *PRS* collects fees for this.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

Dr Johnson said:


> Definitely not.


And there the thread should have ended.


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

Art Rock said:


> And there the thread should have ended.


Amen to this :tiphat:


----------



## Blancrocher (Jul 6, 2013)

I myself have proposed a community bylaw to make it illegal to listen to Justin Bieber when unaccompanied by a minor. I'm afraid that the proceeds that could be used to finance more classical music would be very small, however.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Blancrocher said:


> I myself have proposed a community bylaw to make it illegal to listen to Justin Bieber when unaccompanied by a minor. I'm afraid that the proceeds that could be used to finance more classical music would be very small, however.


Why not just make Justin Bieber, himself, illegal.


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

Let's see. Don't France, Mexico, Norway, and the UK have taxes on soda pop? It's starting to creep into the US also. I guess taxing pop music is a logical extension, uh, right?


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

How about simply taxing stupidity? This would cover much pop music and other worthless activities.


----------



## Blancrocher (Jul 6, 2013)

I think that this thread's proposal would be getting less support than it is if it had been posted in the non-classical subforum.


----------



## Guest (Jun 10, 2016)

Florestan said:


> How about simply taxing stupidity? This would cover much pop music and other worthless activities.


What would you say are worthless activities?


----------



## GreenMamba (Oct 14, 2012)

dogen said:


> What would you say are worthless activities?


You want a bad thread tax, eh?


----------



## Huilunsoittaja (Apr 6, 2010)

Aren't _we _all a bunch of anti-relativists here?


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

How about a snob tax? The whole forum would be thrown into bankruptcy.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Blancrocher said:


> I think that this thread's proposal would be getting less support than it is if it had been posted in the non-classical subforum.


But then it would be unbiased. Where's the fun in that?


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

dogen said:


> What would you say are worthless activities?


Well, we probably could start with politicians and the media in looking for worthless activities.


----------



## Guest (Jun 10, 2016)

Florestan said:


> Well, we probably could start with politicians and the media in looking for worthless activities.


But of course it's all about differing individual perspectives isn't it?

This to me looks like a fine example of a "worthless activity", but for you, it's one of your choices of a "top" popular piece of music:


----------



## clavichorder (May 2, 2011)

dogen said:


> What would you say are worthless activities?


This should be a talk nonsense thread. We could give the longest and most accurate lists.


----------



## mstar (Aug 14, 2013)

dogen said:


> Depends if it's atonal or not.


Here we go again...


----------



## Haydn man (Jan 25, 2014)

Tax everything I say. Tax is good and we should all pay more on everything all the time.
People are too stupid to know what to spend their money on and so should give it all to our benign governments to use wisely


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

dogen said:


> What would you say are worthless activities?


Of course I am joking because you can't tax stupidity, and one person's stupidity is another person's pleasure. A worthless activity occurred on my street last night. Someone smashed a glass bottle in the street. I heard the glass break, a lot of laughing, then they were gone. But I suppose some might call that art.


----------



## Blancrocher (Jul 6, 2013)

Florestan said:


> Of course I am joking because you can't tax stupidity


You're forgetting the voluntary taxes, such as state lotteries.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

Florestan said:


> ... one person's stupidity is another person's pleasure...


And that would be a good reason NOT to call something that so many people enjoy (even on this forum) stupid.


----------



## Sloe (May 9, 2014)

Xenakiboy said:


> I envy you then!


The thing is that I have no music channel on TV and I don´t listen to the radio channels that play pop music so that is how I avoid it. I have also reached the age when I stop bother about the latest hits.


----------



## Iean (Nov 17, 2015)

Sloe said:


> The thing is that I have no music channel on TV and I don´t listen to the radio channels that play pop music so that is how I avoid it. I have also reached the age when I stop bother about the latest hits.


One of the greatest ironies in life is that people who listen to VERY FEW (or sometimes NONE at all) POP music are the ones who are VERY LOUD in saying that pop music is trash, while people like me who listen to a LOT of POP music know that just like there's GOOD CLASSICAL music and there's BAD CLASSICAL music, there is definitely BRILLIANT POP music and there's TRASH POP music:angel:


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

I definitely do not believe that all pop music is trash. However, as I got older, I was listening to less and less of it. Overall, it stopped saying anything to me that was relevant to my life or mind-set; that happened around three decades ago. 

I do find it amusing that we are here at Talk Classical, and there are still members extolling the virtue of pop music. Aren't there any pop music discussion sites for you folks?


----------



## Iean (Nov 17, 2015)

Bulldog said:


> I definitely do not believe that all pop music is trash. However, as I got older, I was listening to less and less of it. Overall, it stopped saying anything to me that was relevant to my life or mind-set; that happened around three decades ago.
> 
> *I do find it amusing that we are here at Talk Classical, and there are still members extolling the virtue of pop music.* Aren't there any pop music discussion sites for you folks?


Maybe because some members find it convenient to praise the virtues of classical music at the expense of pop music:angel:


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Bulldog said:


> I do find it amusing that we are here at Talk Classical, and there are still members extolling the virtue of pop music. Aren't there any pop music discussion sites for you folks?


I have never been on a pop music discussion site (other than a blues forum), but suspect that discussions of pop music here are much more civil than they might be at dedicated pop music site. I don't have any proof of that, just something that I think may be the case. Someone who is on a dedicated pop music site maybe can clarify.

I do recall on the blues forum in a sub-forum on Johnny Winter that I mentioned there was one Johnny Winter album that was my least favorite and this guy all but crucified me for even suggesting that Johnny Winter could put out a not so good album. I think he even put me on block.


----------



## Guest (Jun 11, 2016)

Bulldog said:


> I do find it amusing that we are here at Talk Classical, and there are still members extolling the virtue of pop music. Aren't there any pop music discussion sites for you folks?


Does it have to be either/or? I listen to both classical and popular. These days I listen to more of the former, but my knowledge and experience is greater in the latter. Clearly, I'm not the only one here that enjoys both.

(I used to be on the Prog Archives forum, a jolly good place too).


----------



## Blancrocher (Jul 6, 2013)

As I contemplate a Trump-Clinton election battle, I could almost support an action that would result in masses of people taking to the streets and overtaking the government in an armed rebellion.


----------



## Guest (Jun 11, 2016)

Blancrocher said:


> As I contemplate a Trump-Clinton election battle, I could almost support an action that would result in masses of people taking to the streets and overtaking the government in an armed rebellion.


Are we in Wrong Thread here? Or have you just Had Enough?!?!


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Blancrocher said:


> As I contemplate a Trump-Clinton election battle, I could almost support an action that would result in masses of people taking to the streets and overtaking the government in an armed rebellion.


So the people "take over" the government. What would they do with it? :lol:


----------



## Blancrocher (Jul 6, 2013)

KenOC said:


> So the people "take over" the government. What would they do with it? :lol:


If I had to guess, I think they'd expand music education programs throughout our nation and hold massive classical music concerts on statutory holidays. But I'm not a political scientist, mind you.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

If it were really "the people," they'd likely outlaw classical music and erect gigantic statues of Justin Bieber -- so big they could be easily seen from space. Future archaeologists would formulate all kinds of theories about that and many PhD dissertations would earn students their doctorates.

"It is the year 4022; all of the ancient country of Usa has been buried under many feet of detritus from a catastrophe that occurred back in 1985. Imagine, then, the excitement that Howard Carson, an amateur archeologist at best, experienced when in crossing the perimeter of an abandoned excavation site he felt the ground give way beneath him and found himself at the bottom of a shaft, which, judging from the DO NOT DISTURB sign hanging from an archaic doorknob, was clearly the entrance to a still-sealed burial chamber. Carson's incredible discoveries, including the remains of two bodies, one of then on a ceremonial bed facing an altar that appeared to be a means of communicating with the Gods and the other lying in a porcelain sarcophagus in the Inner Chamber, permitted him to piece together the whole fabric of that extraordinary civilization." --from "Motel of the Mysteries"


----------



## GreenMamba (Oct 14, 2012)

KenOC said:


> If it were really "the people," they'd likely outlaw classical music and erect gigantic statues of Justin Bieber -- so big they could be easily seen from space. Future archaeologists would formulate all kinds of theories about that and many PhD dissertations would earn students their doctorates.


The Justin Bieber straw man must die at some point. Take out every Classical music fan in the world and Justin Bieber would still be despised by most. Much more so than Classical.

Sure, he has his fan base, but I don't know why people seem to think he's beloved by the masses.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

Why (I ask) did someone feel moved to even begin this thread? Looking for trouble? Impress peers? We Are Not Amused.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Strange Magic said:


> Why (I ask) did someone feel moved to even begin this thread?


Which is why I took the whole thread as a joke and figured absurd and irrational responses would be just fine.


----------



## Euterpe (Apr 3, 2016)

Every generation in different era own different taste. And in the future present pop music may be added into the "classical" music.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

KenOC said:


> If it were really "the people," they'd likely outlaw classical music and erect gigantic statues of Justin Bieber -- so big they could be easily seen from space. Future archaeologists would formulate all kinds of theories about that and many PhD dissertations would earn students their doctorates.


Fourteen year olds building gigantic public monuments? They must be more industrious where you live. Here they drink beer and make out by the lake.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

EdwardBast said:


> Fourteen year olds building gigantic public monuments? They must be more industrious where you live. Here they drink beer and make out by the lake.


Uh, I meant that figuratively of course. Literally figuratively.


----------



## Johann Sebastian Bach (Dec 18, 2015)

Strange Magic said:


> Why (I ask) did someone feel moved to even begin this thread? Looking for trouble? Impress peers? We Are Not Amused.





Florestan said:


> Which is why I took the whole thread as a joke and figured absurd and irrational responses would be just fine.


I first thought of taxing pop music the day after I'd conducted a concert in Palestrina Cathedral in Italy a couple of weeks ago. The majority of the programme consisted of motets by Palestrina. These works are sublime - and examples of genius.

I met members of the Palestrina Foundation there. They are also passionate about this man and his music and are focussed on trying to keep his work alive - but are struggling to do so. They are fighting against pop culture, where trivial music is preferred by the masses. This might be because they've not been exposed to the genius of Palestrina; or because market forces are so strong that they've been brainwashed in their musical preferences; or a host of other irresistible forces.

As I left the cathedral after the concert on a wave of high emotion resulting from the sublime performances of masterworks, my reverie was dashed by very loud pop music coming from a café next to the house where Palestrina was brought up. The melody was dull, the harmony was exceptionally limited, the rhythmic patterns predictable and juvenile and the singer was in desperate need of tuition.

So I went to a different café (no pop music) with some of my performers and we mused music - meaningful and meaningless. It was difficult to classify both extremes as "music". The idea of taxing pop music was born of despair and the futility of trying to understand why people can't see that the Emperor wears no clothes. Taxing pop is clearly bonkers but I thought I'd put it on here as a polemic.

Not meant to _look for trouble_, Mr Strange Magic, nor to _impress peers_. Just a quiet protest about materialism and unfairness.


----------



## SiegendesLicht (Mar 4, 2012)

Iean said:


> One of the greatest ironies in life is that people who listen to VERY FEW (or sometimes NONE at all) POP music are the ones who are VERY LOUD in saying that pop music is trash, while people like me who listen to a LOT of POP music know that just like there's GOOD CLASSICAL music and there's BAD CLASSICAL music, there is definitely BRILLIANT POP music and there's TRASH POP music:angel:


Maybe the very reason these people listen to very little pop music is that they have tried out A LOT of pop music - and found it to be trash?


----------



## SiegendesLicht (Mar 4, 2012)

Johann Sebastian Bach said:


> As I left the cathedral after the concert on a wave of high emotion resulting from the sublime performances of masterworks, my reverie was dashed by very loud pop music coming from a café next to the house where Palestrina was brought up. The melody was dull, the harmony was exceptionally limited, the rhythmic patterns predictable and juvenile and the singer was in desperate need of tuition.
> 
> So I went to a different café (no pop music) with some of my performers and we mused music - meaningful and meaningless. It was difficult to classify both extremes as "music". The idea of taxing pop music was born of despair and the futility of trying to understand why people can't see that the Emperor wears no clothes. Taxing pop is clearly bonkers but I thought I'd put it on here as a polemic.


The _Pax Americana_, the realm of militant mediocrity - coming to you next.


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

Back in Palestrina's day, the common people would have just got on with their private business of living in squalor without imposing their musical tastes on their betters. The rights of man is a slippery slope, I tell ya.


----------



## Blancrocher (Jul 6, 2013)

Nereffid said:


> Back in Palestrina's day, the common people would have just got on with their private business of living in squalor without imposing their musical tastes on their betters.


I think you may be underestimating the effect of the Protestant Reformation here. It could be argued that socioeconomically disadvantaged people were more concerned about the musical interests of the elite than they are today.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

Johann Sebastian Bach said:


> I first thought of taxing pop music the day after I'd conducted a concert in Palestrina Cathedral in Italy a couple of weeks ago. The majority of the programme consisted of motets by Palestrina. These works are sublime - and examples of genius.
> 
> Just a quiet protest about materialism and unfairness.


I can understand, and sympathize with, notions that the Great Unwashed are heedless of obvious genius, lack any semblance of taste, and are generally slovenly and ignorant and vile. But I'm not sure that an obsession with materialism or any obvious "unfairness" are the operative culprits here, though I'll be happy to be instructed. Let me assure you that I am myself an elitist of the first rank, but I try always to refrain from whining, which is often the elitist's principle vice.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

I will never understand people who think that their small minority opinion/taste should be forced upon the rest of the world.


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

Art Rock said:


> I will never understand people who think that their small minority opinion/taste should be forced upon the rest of the world.


​


----------



## CDs (May 2, 2016)

As I've aged I have liked less and less radio friendly pop music but I know that what is it on the radio or popular is not written for me or even with me in mind. No producer or teeny bop artist is thinking what would a 30 plus year old man like and buy. No they are thinking what would a tween girl/boy like and buy.
So if you are over 30 just face the fact that you are now past the age where the entertainment industry, for the most part, cares what you like.


----------



## SiegendesLicht (Mar 4, 2012)

Art Rock said:


> I will never understand people who think that their small minority opinion/taste should be forced upon the rest of the world.


In the modern world minority opinions are getting forced on the majority all the time, and the love of classical music would not be the worst of them by far. At least classical fans do not tend to shoot anyone if they do not get theirs.


----------



## Blancrocher (Jul 6, 2013)

I think it might be worth pointing out that "pop music" doesn't necessarily mean "popular." I see a lot of interesting albums posted in the Non-Classical Current Listening Thread that probably sell less well than your average CPO release.


----------



## Figleaf (Jun 10, 2014)

Blancrocher said:


> I think it might be worth pointing out that "pop music" doesn't necessarily mean "popular." I see a lot of interesting albums posted in the Non-Classical Current Listening Thread that probably sell less well than your average CPO release.


It's quite funny to refer casually to the more pretentious type of popular music as 'pop', then sit back and watch the reaction from those would-be intellectuals whose carefully curated playlists have just been bracketed with Adele and Bieber! A bit like when I naughtily used to tease my brother by calling his Masters of the Universe action figures 'dolls'. :lol:


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

SiegendesLicht said:


> In the modern world minority opinions are getting forced on the majority all the time, and the love of classical music would not be the worst of them by far. At least classical fans do not tend to shoot anyone if they do not get theirs.


Are you sure that it's not majority opinions being forced on the minority? That, I thought, was the heart of JSB's complaint. And what's this about shooting people in a discussion of musical likes and dislikes? We Continue To Not Be Amused.


----------



## Reichstag aus LICHT (Oct 25, 2010)

SiegendesLicht said:


> In the modern world minority opinions are getting forced on the majority all the time


That's arguably what made "pop" music popular in the first place, namely the marketing machine that conditions people into "wanting" to listen to so much rubbish. And it's not just the pop marketing machine either; I never cease to be amazed/saddened by the fact that so many people think that opera begins and ends with Bocelli and Potts, or that Clayderman and Rieu are the pinnacle of instrumental virtuosity. I've nothing against the artists at all, but I do despair at the insidious influence exerted by the marketeers over their gullible public.


----------



## CDs (May 2, 2016)

Reichstag aus LICHT said:


> That's arguably what made "pop" music popular in the first place, namely the marketing machine that conditions people into "wanting" to listen to so much rubbish.


When you're young and all you can listen to is the radio the latest pop song won't be rubbish to you because it will be all you know. You don't have to be "conditioned" because you know no different.
It's not until you get older, get more exposure more experience that you will be able to distinguish between good and bad.

That's why I don't fault or get mad at a youngster rockin' out to the latest hit because they know no different. I was the same way as them when I was their age as was many of my fellow TC members.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

Reichstag aus LICHT said:


> That's arguably what made "pop" music popular in the first place, namely the marketing machine that conditions people into "wanting" to listen to so much rubbish. And it's not just the pop marketing machine either; I never cease to be amazed/saddened by the fact that so many people think that opera begins and ends with Bocelli and Potts, or that Clayderman and Rieu are the pinnacle of instrumental virtuosity. I've nothing against the artists at all, but I do despair at the insidious influence exerted by the marketeers over their gullible public.


These "arguments" for and against music and other arts boil down to somebody asserting "The Art I Like is Better (O, So Much Better) than the Miserable Trash you like, and the only reason you prefer your Trash is because Giant Marketing Forces are controlling your mind." None of this is demonstrably true. Better to just know yourself and the world around you so that you can affirm what you prefer in the Arts, and be confident in the integrity of your choices. Is it really all somebody else's fault?


----------



## Reichstag aus LICHT (Oct 25, 2010)

CDs said:


> When you're young and all you can listen to is the radio the latest pop song won't be rubbish to you because it will be all you know.


There are kids out there who don't consider burgers and fries to be rubbish, because it's pretty much all they know. But why is that, and why should it be so?


----------



## Reichstag aus LICHT (Oct 25, 2010)

Strange Magic said:


> These "arguments" for and against music and other arts boil down to somebody asserting "The Art I Like is Better (O, So Much Better) than the Miserable Trash you like


I'm not arguing for or against kinds of music _per se_. My point was that people's apparent free choice is so often an illusion, that they are being manipulated by the marketing machine. If people are being ripped off in the process, whilst mediocrities make millions, that saddens me.


----------



## CDs (May 2, 2016)

Reichstag aus LICHT said:


> But why is that, and why should it be so?


Lack of experience or just bad parenting.

I know for me I liked 90s pop because that's all I was exposed to. It wasn't till I grew up that I found out there was music outside of the top 40.


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

Strange Magic said:


> Better to just know yourself and the world around you so that you can affirm what you prefer in the Arts, and be confident in the integrity of your choices.


Yes, and acknowledge, too, that other people are confident in the integrity of _their_ choices.


----------



## Reichstag aus LICHT (Oct 25, 2010)

CDs said:


> I know for me I liked 90s pop because that's all I was exposed to.


That's almost precisely my point! Well, perhaps the powers that be should expose us to a little more variety, instead of pumping the same kind of stuff down our throats... or into our ears, as the case may be.


----------



## Tristan (Jan 5, 2013)

I've said this before, but I sort of like that I'm one of the few I know who likes classical music. I don't want the "masses" liking it. That's how much of an elitist I am


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

CDs said:


> Lack of experience or just bad parenting.
> 
> I know for me I liked 90s pop because that's all I was exposed to. It wasn't till I grew up that I found out there was music outside of the top 40.


Exposing one's children to many kinds of music might be _good_ parenting, but that doesn't mean that not doing so is _bad_ parenting.


----------



## CDs (May 2, 2016)

Reichstag aus LICHT said:


> That's almost precisely my point! Well, perhaps the powers that be should expose us to a little more variety, instead of pumping the same kind of stuff down our throats... or into our ears, as the case may be.


I agree the powers that be should expose us to more variety but of course all they care about is making money.
But it also has to do with how important music is to you. To most people music isn't really that important so they will listen to whatever the powers that be play for them. To them it's just sound and something to break the silence.
As for me, music is very important and is my favorite hobby. I actively seek out music that I'll like as well new music. I take people's music recommendations seriously and will give a listen to what they recommend. I've discovered many a new artists this way.
This is why I haven't listened to the radio or any streaming services in years (maybe a decade). To me I have advanced beyond the "Top 40".


----------



## CDs (May 2, 2016)

Nereffid said:


> Exposing one's children to many kinds of music might be _good_ parenting, but that doesn't mean that not doing so is _bad_ parenting.


My bad parenting remark was towards *Reichstag aus LICHT* burger and fries analogy and not towards music. Also partly just to be funny.


----------



## Sloe (May 9, 2014)

CDs said:


> When you're young and all you can listen to is the radio the latest pop song won't be rubbish to you because it will be all you know. You don't have to be "conditioned" because you know no different.
> It's not until you get older, get more exposure more experience that you will be able to distinguish between good and bad.
> 
> That's why I don't fault or get mad at a youngster rockin' out to the latest hit because they know no different. I was the same way as them when I was their age as was many of my fellow TC members.


It is not like when you are young you like everything that is played on radio or TV.


----------



## SiegendesLicht (Mar 4, 2012)

CDs said:


> Lack of experience or just bad parenting.
> 
> I know for me I liked 90s pop because that's all I was exposed to. It wasn't till I grew up that I found out there was music outside of the top 40.


You did not have the internet back then (and neither did I). Now every teenager has it, and with it pretty much unlimited range of music. So if they are not exploring various genres, it is not because they have no access to it.


----------



## GreenMamba (Oct 14, 2012)

CDs said:


> My bad parenting remark was towards *Reichstag aus LICHT* burger and fries analogy and not towards music. Also partly just to be funny.


The burgers and fries analogy is confusing because a good burger and fries is, in fact, one of life's glories.


----------



## Guest (Jun 14, 2016)

Taxing "pop" music? What a fascinating idea!

I can see pop artists across the world eager to read the taxman's criteria and the thresholds for 20%, 40% and 95% of income (profit? turnover?) as they ready themselves, their lawyers and their songwriters to create music that does not qualify.

All songs under 3 and a half minutes?
Any song about sex and love?
All songs by anyone called Justin?
Any song judged by a panel of experts to be 'trash written by the talentless'?

You could have tax incentives: if it's accompanied by a 'classical' instrument, or is based on compositions by Stockhausen, Xenakis, Cage, Crumb, Carter or Merzbow, it escapes.

If it's rap, it's taxed, but not if it's accompanied by a video showing a mash-up of Bernstein, Karajan and Rattle.
If it's been produced by Stock, Aitken and Waterman, it attracts 95%, and this applies whenever it's aired on a public broadcasting system (taxing the artist, producer and broadcaster of course.)

Any more mad ideas, JSB?


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

MacLeod said:


> Taxing "pop" music? What a fascinating idea!
> 
> I can see pop artists across the world eager to read the taxman's criteria and the thresholds for 20%, 40% and 95% of income (profit? turnover?) as they ready themselves, their lawyers and their songwriters to create music that does not qualify.


We have to be objective of course. We could define a set of chord progressions common to pop songs, and tax songs based on how many times those progressions are used. In their effort to avoid taxes, songwriters would be forced to be more inventive in their harmonies, surely a good outcome! Just an initial suggestion of course. I'm sure there are many other approaches that would improve the quality and interest of pop music as well as increase revenues for much-needed government boondoggles.


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

CDs said:


> Also partly just to be funny.


Sorry, it's hard to spot the intentional jokes in among the other laughable ideas being presented here!


----------



## Xenakiboy (May 8, 2016)

The following chord progressions need to be made illegal, unless used cleverly and in an educated manner by a certified expert:

A F C G 
C G A F 
C A F G (unless it's Doo ***)
E G D A (Or E G D C)
E C D (in metal)

(This also includes all transportations of key)


----------



## Guest (Jun 14, 2016)

Xenakiboy said:


> a certified expert:


"Certified"?

As in "officially declared insane"?


----------



## Xenakiboy (May 8, 2016)

MacLeod said:


> "Certified"?
> 
> As in "officially declared insane"?


Someone that has proven a strong level of creativity, originality and an educated knowledge of theory? (dare I say) :lol:


----------



## Johann Sebastian Bach (Dec 18, 2015)

I'd be interested to find out how many contributors to this thread are working classical musicians (in fact, I'd be interested to know that about TC in general).

I suggest the passion for the art form is different between those who earn their living from it and those for whom it is a hobby.

I don't think I'd be quite so intolerant of pop music if I weren't working in the classical world. For a start, developing one's skills has taken most of us thousands of hours practising. Many pop songs I hear are performed by people who have relatively little skill as musicians (I grant that there are also some very skilled pop musicians out there, but they're in the minority). A good proportion of these very average pop musicians achieve considerable financial rewards.

The pop world is also filled with music technology, which will give an auto-anything, from drum track to instrumental tone and from vocal tone modulators to gadgets which correct wrong notes. Occasionally, these gadgets are used in the classical world, but, until I hear a robot cellist out-doing Yo-Yo Ma, I think I'll pass.

When you play the classics every day and remain in awe of their structure, their inspiration, their genius, it's very easy to disparage junk music. There's junk in both camps, of course: Strauss waltzes spring to mind. But there's far more junk in the pop domain. I acknowledge that the undefinable matter of taste comes into this - but I'd like the average pop musician to at least have an insight into the fact that a C A F G bass-line, when repeated 48 times, might be bettered.

Please don't get me wrong - I'm not whining that the world's unfair because pop is more popular or better paid. I'm just saying that this particular musician wishes that everyone would love the music of Palestrina _et al_.


----------



## Guest (Jun 14, 2016)

Do a thread with a poll


----------



## Barbebleu (May 17, 2015)

CDs said:


> But it also has to do with how important music is to you. To most people music isn't really that important so they will listen to whatever the powers that be play for them. To them it's just sound and something to break the silence.


This is so true. I have many friends that have absolutely no interest at all in music and they consider my passion to be just one of my idiosyncrasies. Big deal. They are still my friends and it doesn't bother me that they don't hear what I hear.


----------



## Oliver (Feb 14, 2012)

I'd outlaw it completely.


----------



## Xenakiboy (May 8, 2016)

I think there is some AMAZING and praise worthy music in the non-classical world. I love jazz especially but I grew up around rock, Folk, R&B (Doo ***, Motown) and metal, which I like (as well as classical, which this isn't about). Of course, I will never be able to escape pop (the genre) because it is literally (in the proper use of the word) *EVERYWHERE*, so count that too, but not by choice.

I am open-minded to most music, I even really loved a rap album recently, though the genre in general is not to my tastes.

I have strong views about the commercial pop industry but I prefer not to write essays on things I dislike, but to put it bluntly, there are obvious things that need changing that have been growing since the 50s (especially), it stems from the profit based, ad marketing, buy, sell society that the world has turned from that.
Edit: also, the sound collage group Negativland dedicated almost their entire output to an abstract artistic reflection of this commercial society, which is fun to listen to!

Also, I don't want to ever hear A F C G AGAIN! :lol:


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

P


Johann Sebastian Bach said:


> Please don't get me wrong - I'm not whining that the world's unfair because pop is more popular or better paid. I'm just saying that this particular musician wishes that everyone would love the music of Palestrina _et al_.


I'm glad that's cleared up. It seemed suspiciously close to whining for a while. I wish everybody loved cante flamenco as much as I do (but then maybe I wouldn't like it so much myself ).


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

dogen said:


> Do a thread with a poll


I second this, helps always :lol:


----------



## GreenMamba (Oct 14, 2012)

Johann Sebastian Bach said:


> I'd be interested to find out how many contributors to this thread are working classical musicians (in fact, I'd be interested to know that about TC in general).
> 
> I suggest the passion for the art form is different between those who earn their living from it and those for whom it is a hobby.
> 
> I don't think I'd be quite so intolerant of pop music if I weren't working in the classical world. For a start, developing one's skills has taken most of us thousands of hours practising. Many pop songs I hear are performed by people who have relatively little skill as musicians (I grant that there are also some very skilled pop musicians out there, but they're in the minority). A good proportion of these very average pop musicians achieve considerable financial rewards.


I'm curious as to whether you'd accept this argument for anything other than music.

E.g., Do you think you should pay an extra tax for drinking cheap wine (let's say $10-15 a bottle stuff) which doesn't take as much effort to produce as Premier Cru? Some french vintners might complain that no one appreciates their craft any more.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

The simple solution: Tax Everything! Oh wait. They already are doing that in many countries, no?

But shouldn't a person be taxed for clipping their own nails? After all, it hurts the manicure business, those obnoxious do-it-yourselfers!


----------



## Blancrocher (Jul 6, 2013)

GreenMamba said:


> I'm curious as to whether you'd accept this argument for anything other than music.
> 
> E.g., Do you think you should pay an extra tax for drinking cheap wine (let's say $10-15 a bottle stuff) which doesn't take as much effort to produce as Premier Cru? Some french vintners might complain that no one appreciates their craft any more.


I'd be comfortable with a high tax rate on both inexpensive and expensive wines so long as both are easily available for free online.


----------

