Why do people listen to pop music?

[Bob]

I simply cannot seem to figure out the answer to this question. I'm a classic rock guy myself, and I can justify this. I play guitar and nearly all great guitar riffs, licks, and solos are in classic rock music. Also, the lyrics make sense, tell a story, and are easy to relate to. I also feel like the guys who made the music were talented. Nowadays, none of this applies. There are no instruments in pop. The lyrics never make sense, and when they do it's on a completely pointless topic. Finally, I feel like no pop musicians have talent. Watch a live performance and hear how different they sound (if they're not lip syncing). Look at how they have to have dancers and all kinds of things happening onstage. Rock and Roll guys don't need all that. I feel like it's all a cover up for their lack of talent. However, I'd love to be proven wrong here. Somebody help me make some sense out of this...

[Riot.EXE]

I simply cannot seem to figure out the answer to this question. I'm a classic rock guy myself, and I can justify this. I play guitar and nearly all great guitar riffs, licks, and solos are in classic rock music. Also, the lyrics make sense, tell a story, and are easy to relate to. I also feel like the guys who made the music were talented. Nowadays, none of this applies. There are no instruments in pop. The lyrics never make sense, and when they do it's on a completely pointless topic. Finally, I feel like no pop musicians have talent. Watch a live performance and hear how different they sound (if they're not lip syncing). Look at how they have to have dancers and all kinds of things happening onstage. Rock and Roll guys don't need all that. I feel like it's all a cover up for their lack of talent. However, I'd love to be proven wrong here. Somebody help me make some sense out of this...

  (That's Lady Gaga...what's that about a lack of talent and can't play instruments or write their own shit?)

[mancomb]

Most pop musicians are very talented performers, rather than singer song writers.  They can sing well and dance well and are just good at being entertaining, I think this is very important, especially live.  I'd rather go to a Rihanna concert and have fun dancing than sit watching some indie band who's music might be good but they just stand there and play it.  I might as well just listen to it if they're not gonna be performing it well.  Also there's a lot of people who can produce music and write music well but can't/don't want to perform it.  So they can write music for pop stars who then perform it.  It's not like most pop singers pretend to write their own stuff either, unless they actually do.  As far as not liking pop music, that's your personal tastes, like I wonder how people like tomatoes but I don't think people who eat tomatoes don't have bad knowledge of food.

[Shiden Kai]

Music is all about evoking emotion.  Whether that emotion is serious, festive, or somewhere in-between...

Personally, I like pop music.  Why?  Because it allows people to (momentarily) escape the rigors of day to day life.  The concerts are usually entertaining, and the music is often catchy and fun  -  even when the song itself may carry a serious message.

As for the whole lack of talent thing.. haha   Most (albeit not all) pop stars are ridiculously talented, as Riot.exe showcased.  Just because you don't like the music doesn't mean that it's full of talentless hacks.  Besides, if it was that easy for you to replicate, then I'd highly encourage your nude butt to get off this forum and to start pursuing a career in pop music. :D :D

[mancomb]

ck of talent thing.. haha   Most (albeit not all) pop stars are ridiculously talented, as Riot.exe showcased.  Just because you don't like the music doesn't mean that it's full of talentless hacks.  Besides, if it was that easy for you to replicate, then I'd highly encourage your nude butt to get off this forum and to start pursuing a career in pop music. :D :D

Haha, if it didn't require talent everyone would be a popstar. 

[Dario Western]

Kim Wilde summed it up the best when she said "A good pop record lies in the grooves".  Simple chord changes, catchy lyrics, hooks, and a pleasing voice makes for good pop music.

I am a songwriter myself who has been writing both rock and pop songs since 1986, and pop is really short for 'popular'.  If the masses buy a song, it's classified as pop.  The Beatles were pop.  The Supremes were pop.  T-Rex and Abba were pop.  Take That were pop.  Even Nirvana, The Sex Pistols, The Clash, and Oasis were pop despite their rock backgrounds.

Perhaps this video conversation with Triple J radio CEO Richard Kingsmill and million-selling Australian songwriter and producer Mike Chapman goes a long way in explaining the art of pop music and how it sells:

[Infinity Biscuit]

Kyle, one thing to remember about anything "classics" is that by default classics have a higher standard of quality than contemporary stuff. You have decades of material and only the best is taken from each of it, stacked up against literally everything released today. It's not fair at all to compare the two free of this context.

Also, you are entirely off base when you say that new stuff has lyrics that don't make sense or have no deep meaning. I've never really been touched on a deep, deep level by classic rock lyrics, but some of Marina and the Diamonds' songs have lyrics that hit me so hard I literally can't listen to those tracks anymore because the hit me too deeply.

Just remember these two things:
The classic rock of old was the pop music of its day, also lambasted by people at the time for being so much worse than what they or their parents grew up with

Your feelings here are pretty common for people your age looking for an identity of their own. They look at what they see as popular and put themselves above or beyond it in some way. Not saying that you're doing anything wrong, but showing that it's something almost everyone does in their own way, for perspective.

[Bob]

I simply cannot seem to figure out the answer to this question. I'm a classic rock guy myself, and I can justify this. I play guitar and nearly all great guitar riffs, licks, and solos are in classic rock music. Also, the lyrics make sense, tell a story, and are easy to relate to. I also feel like the guys who made the music were talented. Nowadays, none of this applies. There are no instruments in pop. The lyrics never make sense, and when they do it's on a completely pointless topic. Finally, I feel like no pop musicians have talent. Watch a live performance and hear how different they sound (if they're not lip syncing). Look at how they have to have dancers and all kinds of things happening onstage. Rock and Roll guys don't need all that. I feel like it's all a cover up for their lack of talent. However, I'd love to be proven wrong here. Somebody help me make some sense out of this...

  (That's Lady Gaga...what's that about a lack of talent and can't play instruments or write their own shit?)

I'm not talking about this kind of music. Yes it's a pop star, but that is not a pop song (at least not in my book). I'm talking about kesha and katy perry and, well most of lady gaga' s music.

[Bob]

Most pop musicians are very talented performers, rather than singer song writers.  They can sing well and dance well and are just good at being entertaining, I think this is very important, especially live.  I'd rather go to a Rihanna concert and have fun dancing than sit watching some indie band who's music might be good but they just stand there and play it.  I might as well just listen to it if they're not gonna be performing it well.  Also there's a lot of people who can produce music and write music well but can't/don't want to perform it.  So they can write music for pop stars who then perform it.  It's not like most pop singers pretend to write their own stuff either, unless they actually do.  As far as not liking pop music, that's your personal tastes, like I wonder how people like tomatoes but I don't think people who eat tomatoes don't have bad knowledge of food.

I really don't think a lot of them can sing well. There's still lip-syncing today and obviously digital audio editing that can make anyone sound good. Not to say guys like Bruno Mars or John Mayer can't sing. That would be stupid. But at least a decent amount of female pop singers can't sing. And yeah, they can dance. But I don't find that to be important for a musician. However, I guess others feel differently. I'm simply not entertained by a bunch of people jumping around and dancing when I go to watch someone perform music. It's distracting and detracts from the performance of the musicians. When you watch true musicians perform, they drag you in and grab your attention with the music alone (i.e.-Woodstock; granted drugs also assisted there). And the fact that they can't write their own music supports my statements. They may be entertaining, but to put them in the same class as anyone who takes a life event and turns it into a song that rhymes, flows, and makes sense is ridiculous.

[Bob]

Music is all about evoking emotion.  Whether that emotion is serious, festive, or somewhere in-between...

Personally, I like pop music.  Why?  Because it allows people to (momentarily) escape the rigors of day to day life.  The concerts are usually entertaining, and the music is often catchy and fun  -  even when the song itself may carry a serious message.

As for the whole lack of talent thing.. haha   Most (albeit not all) pop stars are ridiculously talented, as Riot.exe showcased.  Just because you don't like the music doesn't mean that it's full of talentless hacks.  Besides, if it was that easy for you to replicate, then I'd highly encourage your nude butt to get off this forum and to start pursuing a career in pop music. :D :D

Okay, I can agree with your first few statements. However, I still have to reside to my previous comments on the talent. So okay, they can write a love song, play simple piano, and sing. So they have God-given talents as well as basic musical talents. However, hear me out here. A few members of Lynyrd Skynyrd went to a bar one night to party. While they were there, the lead singer, Ronnie Van Zant (RIP), shared a dance with a girl. A guy walked up to him and accosted him and told him to back off, as that was his girlfriend. He asked him to back up and let him leave and he'd never see him again. They went to the Hell House (where they wrote their songs and practiced) and in two hours laid down a 4 minute track and Ronnie wrote words to it based on what happened that night. That song of course is called "Gimme Three Steps" and is revered as an absolute classic.

I guess my point here is you just can't put Lady Gaga in the same category as guys like that. You just have to think that they were put here for a purpose-to make music. The sheer talent it takes to do what they did is simply unmatched. That goes for almost all classic bands. It goes for some modern music too, mostly in the country genre (though most country seems to be based on beer, trucks, dirt roads, and women, and the lyrics all to often seem only to be in the song because they rhyme). But I just don't see how they could ever be seen in the same light.

[Bob]

Kim Wilde summed it up the best when she said "A good pop record lies in the grooves".  Simple chord changes, catchy lyrics, hooks, and a pleasing voice makes for good pop music.

I am a songwriter myself who has been writing both rock and pop songs since 1986, and pop is really short for 'popular'.  If the masses buy a song, it's classified as pop.  The Beatles were pop.  The Supremes were pop.  T-Rex and Abba were pop.  Take That were pop.  Even Nirvana, The Sex Pistols, The Clash, and Oasis were pop despite their rock backgrounds.

Perhaps this video conversation with Triple J radio CEO Richard Kingsmill and million-selling Australian songwriter and producer Mike Chapman goes a long way in explaining the art of pop music and how it sells:

I understand the concept of pop music, but you know what I meant in this situation. There's just not another word to describe Lady Gaga or Katy Perry's music that seemed more fitting.

[Bob]

Kyle, one thing to remember about anything "classics" is that by default classics have a higher standard of quality than contemporary stuff. You have decades of material and only the best is taken from each of it, stacked up against literally everything released today. It's not fair at all to compare the two free of this context.

Also, you are entirely off base when you say that new stuff has lyrics that don't make sense or have no deep meaning. I've never really been touched on a deep, deep level by classic rock lyrics, but some of Marina and the Diamonds' songs have lyrics that hit me so hard I literally can't listen to those tracks anymore because the hit me too deeply.

Just remember these two things:
The classic rock of old was the pop music of its day, also lambasted by people at the time for being so much worse than what they or their parents grew up with

Your feelings here are pretty common for people your age looking for an identity of their own. They look at what they see as popular and put themselves above or beyond it in some way. Not saying that you're doing anything wrong, but showing that it's something almost everyone does in their own way, for perspective.

Now your first paragraph isn't true. I'd be willing to bet you couldn't name a single song by Toto or Kansas (minus Dust in the Wind or Carry on Wayward Son) without looking it up, but they're still played on classic rock radio even today. Now I understand that just because someone today doesn't know it doesn't mean people didn't know it in the '70s, but you get what I'm trying to say. Not all classic rock was popular and not all classic rock that we know today is the best of the era. I, along with most enthusiasts, much prefer classic rock's deep cuts over the songs everyone knows today.

Remember, I'm talking about today's popular music, such as Katy Perry or Kesha or Miley Cyrus. As a matter of fact I want to address that now in response to all comments. I don't just mean modern music even if I said that in my first post. I mean modern pop music. The stuff that you hear on pop radio.

This is true, and I failed to acknowledge this up to this point. I guess there will always be people like me who hate what's current and there always has been.

You may be right here. I'm definitely not looking to be different, as I generally hang out with people who are "popular" and always play on their phones and twitter and listen to hip hop and what not. I would love to have something in common with them other than the fact that we just get along. However, I do try to shape what I do around an old-school Southern persona that I feel suits me best and is who I am.

[Kyle]

I love pop music. Because it talks about things I can relate to. I like rap too. Mostly Lil' Kim. But she raps about things I like, money and dick. The beats are fun and infectious. It doesn't need to be serious.

Not to mention many "classics" are not technically impressive. Nor are the singers any good. For example look at Geddy Lee. He's an awful singer. Eddie Vedder, Billy Corgan, Kurt Cobain (who also couldn't play guitar), Thom Yorke, and Bob Dylan. None of them are very good.
Somehow people justify it, yet they criticize pop singers for having "bad" voices.
Look at lots of pop singers, they're genuinely talented. Amy Winehouse, Adele, Beyonce, Whitney Houston, Mariah Carey, Michael Jackson.
People who were considered pop in their day are now classics.

[Baseballfan]

Ignorance of good music genre ? Just listening to the top 40 radio station or whatever MTV promotes?

[Dario Western]

The Australian premier rock music radio station Triple M has an advertising slogan saying "Real music is made with instruments, not computers".  A keyboard is an instrument, but since the early 80's it has overshadowed its use in popular music particularly with sequencers, samplers and drum machines.  Traditional instruments like strings, brass and woodwind that were used in pop music prior to the 80's have been replaced with keyboards.

I would really like to see pop, rap, R&B and hip-hop dispense with samplers and drum machines and go back to using traditional instruments. 

Whilst I like some indie rock and pop, performance wise such bands need to loosen up and let go on stage instead of just standing in one place looking down at the floor (aka "shoegazing").  It doesn't impress audiences. 

Audiences like bands who are animated, controversial, and have sex appeal regardless of what genre they are.