Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: Mainstream Vs. Underground

  1. #1
    Master Member thefallofjake's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    There's a hole in the world like a great black pit and the vermin of the world inhabit it.
    Posts
    625

    Default Mainstream Vs. Underground

    The most popular music heard on the radio, tv, etc. would be considered "mainstream" and I have noticed a trend of "music fans" who seem to stray away from these artists because they think they are "over rated". I know everyone has their own opinions, but how may someone overlook the fact of good music because of popularity? Let's take Lady Gaga for example. She dropped out of college. There has to be some reason she is so famous today. And that reason is because she is talented. Adam Lambert, I see that people either love or hate him. I think he is a good singer. I cannot understand how someone can hear him sing and say that he is not good. What is your opinion on the subject? Do people think it is cool to listen to music that is not as popular as mainstream artists?

  2. #2
    Super Moderator In Winter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    15,692
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    It's all opinion. People can like mainstream if they want, and same for people who like bands who are in the underground/ garage band phase.

    I personally like to go the underground stage and find bands that don't get as much recognition they deserve, and totally fanboy out on them and show people that there is great music out there that just needs to be searched for.

  3. #3

    Default

    It's because being a hipster has now become mainstream...hmmm


  4. #4
    Forum God PPGcoolgirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    A land down under.
    Posts
    2,902

    Default

    Like IW said, it's all opinion. I stay away from it mainly because I personally don't think many mainstream artists are very good. I think their popularity is mostly based on their image, not their talent.

  5. #5
    Master Member thefallofjake's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    There's a hole in the world like a great black pit and the vermin of the world inhabit it.
    Posts
    625

    Default

    I like a mixture of everything. I'll listen to something like Adele in the car with my girlfriend, get home and turn up some Pg.99. I like both artists/groups though. I just feel like people who like music a lot tend to shy away from the more popular musicians. Take everything away from Adam Lambert, and just let him sing. It's great.

  6. #6
    Forum God PPGcoolgirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    A land down under.
    Posts
    2,902

    Default

    I dislike Adam Lambert's voice and style. I feel the same about Lady Gaga. I give these people... I don't know.. About 3 more years to be in the spotlight, if that, then they'll be forgotten.. Old news. They're just fad music. I like music that'll last a lifetime.

  7. #7
    Master Member thefallofjake's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    There's a hole in the world like a great black pit and the vermin of the world inhabit it.
    Posts
    625

    Default

    I doubt Lambert will be famous for much longer. But Lady Gaga I think is a different story. You never stop hearing about her, and it just is not because of her music. It's her whole personality. I think all of this forms a new question though. What is the difference of mainstream and over-rated? Compare Katy Perry to Adele.

  8. #8
    Forum God PPGcoolgirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    A land down under.
    Posts
    2,902

    Default

    I honestly think Gaga's only famous because of her image. It all pretty much has to do with marketing. Now to answer your second question, I think overrated is just something that a lot of people like that's not good enough to be getting all of the attention. Mainstream is just music that fits to a certain style that a majority will like, if that makes any sense. I think mainstream more defines an era.

  9. #9
    Master Member keigh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Philadelphia, Pa
    Posts
    625

    Default

    Mainstream pop music is determined more by image and an artist's ability to allow themselves to be controlled and "huckstered" around in the media than it has to do with talent. If it was more about talent alone, alot of underground artists would be very well known today and instead of clogging up the radio waves, Lady Gaga would be a wedding singer and Justin Beiber would still be a YouTube nobody. It's nothing new. It's been going on since the music business started. It's all in the value of an artist's marketability. If you can make the little girls scream or want to dress up like you, you're in. Then you can get them to follow you off the cliff and give you all their money.

    If all Lady Gaga, Kanye West, Adam Lambert, Katy Perry, Beyonce or whoever, ever did was just record music and put on concerts, they still wouldn't be half as popular as they are today. It's not the music. Their music isn't anything new, fresh or revolutionary. It's the red carpet events, the videos, the controversy over their sexuality, the "baby bumps", the outrageous publicity stunts, the melt-downs, their relationships, affairs or break-ups with whatever celebrities they're linked with in the tabloids every week, the papparazzi, etc. that makes them popular and mainstream. The average fan of these types of artists couldn't care less about the quality of their music as long as they get to see new pics and something juicy and scandalous to read about them in the entertainment and gossip pages each week. It's all about the character, personality and day-to-day goings-on of the artist. Blame videos and Twitter. It's all this superfluous junk that makes people see them as over-rated. Actually that's a good thing because it means people are seeing through the bs and looking for more artistic content.

    I can name at least 100 acts who are alot more talented than any of these mainstream pop stars yet are still trying to get noticed by major labels, still riding around in vans, playing to half empty 75 seat capacity dives in Toledo, Ohio because they don't have a marketable image or they're music is too esoteric or alternative. But a majority of them are just more interested in making music and being able to control their own careers than being media cartoon characters and wearing a dress made out of meat for atttention.

  10. #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by keigh View Post
    Mainstream pop music is determined more by image and an artist's ability to allow themselves to be controlled and "huckstered" around in the media than it has to do with talent. If it was more about talent alone, alot of underground artists would be very well known today and instead of clogging up the radio waves, Lady Gaga would be cheap wedding dresses singer and Justin Beiber would still be a YouTube nobody. It's nothing new. It's been going on since the music business started. It's all in the value of an artist's marketability. If you can make the little girls scream or want to dress up like you, you're in. Then you can get them to follow you off the cliff and give you all their money.

    If all Lady Gaga, Kanye West, Adam Lambert, Katy Perry, Beyonce or whoever, ever did was just record music and put on concerts, they still wouldn't be half as popular as they are today. It's not the music. Their music isn't anything new, fresh or revolutionary. It's the red carpet events, the videos, the controversy over their sexuality, the "baby bumps", the outrageous publicity stunts, the melt-downs, their relationships, affairs or break-ups with whatever celebrities they're linked with in the tabloids every week, the papparazzi, etc. that makes them popular and mainstream. The average fan of these types of artists couldn't care less about the quality of their music as long as they get to see new pics and something juicy and scandalous to read about them in the entertainment and gossip pages each week. It's all about the character, personality and day-to-day goings-on of the artist. Blame videos and Twitter. It's all this superfluous junk that makes people see them as over-rated. Actually that's a good thing because it means people are seeing through the bs and looking for more artistic content.

    I can name at least 100 acts who are alot more talented than any of these mainstream pop stars yet are still trying to get noticed by major labels, still riding around in vans, playing to half empty 75 seat capacity dives in Toledo, Ohio because they don't have a marketable image or they're music is too esoteric or alternative. But a majority of them are just more interested in making music and being able to control their own careers than being media cartoon characters and wearing a dress made out of meat for atttention.
    For me mainstream music still holds the top spot. It really freshens me up just love the music
    Last edited by LionelWoods; 05-29-2013 at 01:49 AM.

  11. #11

    Default

    I actually like a lot of mainstream music - usually for totally different reasons than I enjoy underground music. The problem I have with the OP's premise though is it assumes musical talent is some objectively measurable thing. I don't think most underground acts are any less talented different than mainstream acts, it's just different music for a different market.
    MEOW MEOW MEOW MEOW

  12. #12

    Default

    I find that most of the music I listen to winds up being underground, but I won't say that just because its on the radio or alot of people like it, automatically makes it trash. There's good mainstream music, but alot of it is trash it seems like

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •