Is more music becoming more commercial with each year passing?

Posted by: 0FOver

Vote
23 Total Votes
1

Yes

19 votes
9 comments
2

No

4 votes
1 comment
Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
briantheliberal says2015-05-17T04:21:26.5756704-05:00
There is much less artistry in music now.
triangle.128k says2015-05-17T08:34:39.0132332-05:00
The music industry is filled with morons.
dmussi12 says2015-05-17T09:01:09.2154291-05:00
Can someone give me some specific examples of commercialization? Even in pop, the most commercial genre out there, artists like Ed Sheeran (who I personally dislike), Beyonce, and Taylor Swift put out really good albums last year. Rock, which is still the most popular genre in America, and I think the world, is seeing more artists branch out, some returning to classic roots, and some perfecting their pre-established styles. Hip-hop has seen a ridiculous amount of growth since the mid 2000's, IMO its lowest point. Kendrick Lamar's TPAB was MUCH less commercial than his previous project, yet it set a record for streams on Spotify. If anything, that alone is confirmation that artists can put out works without radio appeal, and still become massively popular, so being commercial is clearly not the same as being successful.
dmussi12 says2015-05-17T09:07:35.8157445-05:00
Let's take another song - "Post To Be" by Omarion. This song is extremely 'commercial,' if that can be used as an objective adjective. It has an upbeat, bass-driven beat with catchy pop-synths. Its a fun song to listen to. Does this mean Omarion is a 'commercialized' R&B artist? I'd say no. The album it was on was hardly the same. I can't say the name because censoring, but it was an emotional, sensual, and, dare I say, artistic project, and was received very well by critics. If the artists that make 'poppy' tracks, which are likely required by record labels but I would argue have artistic merit, still have the freedom to make 80% 'non-poppy' tracks, how is the entire industry becoming more commercial?
Stefy says2015-05-17T09:33:01.3216698-05:00
Dmussi12: You realize that commerial music doesnt equal bad music right? You can be an artist with great music and still be a product contolled by a thousand writers and the industry.
Stefy says2015-05-17T09:36:19.6575663-05:00
I hate how commertial its become. I mean when is the last time anyone in mainstream music or even the indie scene did anything risky or rebellious? I miss all the songs about social justice and the establishment and thinggs that went against thw usual order of society. Nothing relevant actually does that anymore. I think the closest weve gotten is Take Me to Church which wouldnt even be brave with its message. It claims to be about a gay couple but puts she in the song so you need to watch the video to get it. Thats what commercialism is. You have to weaken your message to sell albums instead if being brave and taking a risk and actually saying something.
0FOver says2015-05-17T09:37:04.3109116-05:00
Commercial as in "sold out" artists. Which mostly means, the artists don't do it for the music anymore and find shortcuts for big money. This destroys the art.
0FOver says2015-05-17T12:22:58.2122542-05:00
@dmussi12 an example would be in the elctronic music world the whole Spinnin' Records label is prove for pure commercialism and 0 originality. Ultra Music label has been a bit good in the past, but now it's awful. All because of the money, they create nonoriginal music for big and easy money. It's no longer an art, it's a business.
0FOver says2015-05-17T12:25:50.1164633-05:00
I don't feel like I need to address each and every one of them, the list would be too long, but the fact is, it's changing in a bad direction, it's not fully there yet. Also there are still plenty of artists, that are still concentrating fully on the art, there is no doubt about that.
Diqiucun_Cunmin says2015-05-17T12:33:09.4834342-05:00
I hate that musicians have to make cookie-cutter recordings of hackneyed pieces because it sells. Yundi Li is a great pianist, but he has to play FI, Chopin 9/2, Pathetique and Moonlight all the time... It gets boring. He plays these pieces well, to be sure, but I would really prefer hearing his Liszt B Minor. Meanwhile, nobody is willing to play the Schubert sonatas - market too small, perhaps.
dmussi12 says2015-05-17T12:34:00.9328938-05:00
@stefy @0FOver I did address sort of the wrong thing in my comments, but I will stand on my vote. Record labels, the creators of commercialization, are dying. There ARE more indie artists, and fewer are signing to labels. This article nicely sums up what I'm saying: http://www.vibe.com/2013/08/opinion-why-major-record-labels-are-dying-slow-death/
dmussi12 says2015-05-17T12:37:15.5460573-05:00
The point is that more indie bands and musicians are coming out and gaining followers through their own means, especially with the internet. Labels will continue to pay for hit singles, but also to compete with and try to sign indie artists, they will have to allow increased creativity and artistry or die. This can already be seen. I don't follow electronic music, so I can't speak as any authority there, but I am a huge follower of hip-hop, where you can see the decline of major labels, increased creativity, and more branching off from the styles that sold in the past.
0FOver says2015-05-17T12:49:25.5769856-05:00
@dmussi12 about that article, it's true, but that doesn't mean, that internet distribution can't be commercial. Let's take an example - Beatport. Beatport gets charts up, only on mainstream artists, which have become famous, because of a label. If they get down from that chart, another mainstream artist gets on their place. No small artists can get there without being a label gift. http://i.imgur.com/OTFQeYn.jpg?1 The internet can be as bad as the major labels. Even if they die, the internet will screw it up.
dmussi12 says2015-05-17T14:11:27.6222661-05:00
You make a really good point, since sites like Beatport and Spotify function that way. However, they are not like labels in that they do not put prior restrictions on music before its release (requiring a certain number of radio-friendly songs), but limits on creativity exist only as a natural consequence of popularity. In any case, your objection doesn't mean the music itself is changing due to commercial influence. There's more money in signing to labels than anything else, and since fewer artists are doing that, it's quite evident commercialization is on a net decline. Money is not in music as much as it once was.
0FOver says2015-05-18T05:42:30.7678399-05:00
It may really be declining after all. Let's just hope the commercial side of music goes to the 0 and stays there.
CKLim says2015-05-19T04:47:55.2539062-05:00
Money comes first :(
lannan13 says2015-05-22T12:23:44.0669912-05:00
Somewhat.
dmussi12 says2015-05-23T12:51:19.0213630-05:00
Then comes my other point: commercial music is not at all necessarily bad music.
TheMadonnaDebater says2015-07-15T08:04:26.0211506-05:00
Briantheliberal, I agree, but at least there are still SOME more musical artists left.

Freebase Icon   Portions of this page are reproduced from or are modifications based on work created and shared by Google and used according to terms described in the Creative Commons 3.0 Attribution License.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.