David Icke's Official Forums (https://forum.davidicke.com/index.php)
-   Entertainment Industry (https://forum.davidicke.com/forumdisplay.php?f=26)
-   -   Originality in music (https://forum.davidicke.com/showthread.php?t=321236)

decode reality 25-03-2018 06:24 PM

Originality in music
 
It's impossible to really draw a line that separates the pop music of an era gone and that of the present. Though one of the most noticeable differences between popular music I would roughly say up to the mid 90s, and that of the 21st century (including late 90s) is the way originality is less prized.

Music is often painted as serving an elite agenda and nothing else, a perception that unfairly tars all music with the same brush, and throws the baby out with the bathwater. The truth is, in order to get the attention of the audience, whether it was playing in a little pub, or being in the limelight, you had to have your own material, first of all. The material had to have something about it that made it stand out.

Long before the millennial vogue for tribute acts, bands that played covers of top 40 songs used to be seen as cheesy and not the real deal. With less money in the music industry for most original artists (less venues, lower sales due to pirating, little returns from streaming), there's less incentive for musicians to pursue an original path.

What happened?

iamawaveofthesea 25-03-2018 06:34 PM

Gatekeepers

if you look at the corporate media in the US it used to be made up of scores of seperate organisations and now it has been consolidated into 6 mega-corporations

Most people in the US rely on those 6 mega-corps for their news and information, so if you want to control most of the flow of information to the minds of the public then you only need to be able to own or influence 6 corporations and you have a monopoly on the control of the flow of information

JP Morgan (found to be a rothschild agent after his death) sent his agents to establish what were the 20 widest selling newspapers in the US and then he bought them; this anecdote serves to prove that powerful people have understood for a long time that if you want to control the flow of information then you need to control the market in that

So then all JP morgan had to do was put handpicked agents to act as editors of the newspapers he bought and he was able to tell them what information to present to the public; this way his agents acted as 'gatekeepers' by controlling key positions that were then able to control all the activity that went on beneath them in those organisations as all content has to be approved by the editors before it can be published

Its the same with the music industry which is also dominated by mega-corporations and the rothschild cabal have their agents in key positions of the industry controlling what content is produced

white light 25-03-2018 08:04 PM

Hip Hop and Trance music have attuned modern ears to simple beats, almost monotonic melodies, and a minimal amount of chord and key changes. Perhaps this doesn't allow much scope for originality.

jake_ball 25-03-2018 09:19 PM

I can only speak from my own personal persective here, and I would say that the reason that I dont like anything new in music is cos of the following :-

- X-factor and the like have created a top 40 that is totally soulless and everything sounds the same. Cos of this, I have reverted back to the old songs like Ram Jam Black Betty cos it is a great song and lots and lots of other great old songs. And I wont really give the new modern stuff a chance any more. Modern songs just make me angry now lol

- Maybe I am getting old and can't move on. But I dont believe that that is the case.

- I know that the REAL artists are not really given the chance by the MSM, so if I wanted to find the real artists, I would have to spend a LOT of my time trying to find them, whereas in the old days the MSM would let REAL artists on the radio and on tv - At least to an extent anyway.

- I use Youtube to watch the old songs from the past.

I do watch SOME new stuff on Youtube, but not much AT ALL really.

I feel sorry for the young kids these days. My kids are brought up with old music.

decode reality 25-03-2018 09:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by iamawaveofthesea (Post 1063010380)
Gatekeepers

if you look at the corporate media in the US it used to be made up of scores of seperate organisations and now it has been consolidated into 6 mega-corporations

Most people in the US rely on those 6 mega-corps for their news and information, so if you want to control most of the flow of information to the minds of the public then you only need to be able to own or influence 6 corporations and you have a monopoly on the control of the flow of information

JP Morgan (found to be a rothschild agent after his death) sent his agents to establish what were the 20 widest selling newspapers in the US and then he bought them; this anecdote serves to prove that powerful people have understood for a long time that if you want to control the flow of information then you need to control the market in that

So then all JP morgan had to do was put handpicked agents to act as editors of the newspapers he bought and he was able to tell them what information to present to the public; this way his agents acted as 'gatekeepers' by controlling key positions that were then able to control all the activity that went on beneath them in those organisations as all content has to be approved by the editors before it can be published

Its the same with the music industry which is also dominated by mega-corporations and the rothschild cabal have their agents in key positions of the industry controlling what content is produced

Centralisation is one aspect of it, as I've mentioned on other similar discussions of the topic, though I don't see it as the sole reason. There's also aesthetic, economic, sociological and technological factors to consider. Probably others.

decode reality 25-03-2018 09:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by white light (Post 1063010397)
Hip Hop and Trance music have attuned modern ears to simple beats, almost monotonic melodies, and a minimal amount of chord and key changes. Perhaps this doesn't allow much scope for originality.

Definitely since the early 90s, there's been a lot of music that's been mainly rhythm-driven, and rhythms created by machines. That can be good but melody went out of the window.

decode reality 25-03-2018 09:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jake_ball (Post 1063010428)
I can only speak from my own personal persective here, and I would say that the reason that I dont like anything new in music is cos of the following :-

- X-factor and the like have created a top 40 that is totally soulless and everything sounds the same. Cos of this, I have reverted back to the old songs like Ram Jam Black Betty cos it is a great song and lots and lots of other great old songs. And I wont really give the new modern stuff a chance any more. Modern songs just make me angry now lol

- Maybe I am getting old and can't move on. But I dont believe that that is the case.

- I know that the REAL artists are not really given the chance by the MSM, so if I wanted to find the real artists, I would have to spend a LOT of my time trying to find them, whereas in the old days the MSM would let REAL artists on the radio and on tv - At least to an extent anyway.

- I use Youtube to watch the old songs from the past.

I do watch SOME new stuff on Youtube, but not much AT ALL really.

I feel sorry for the young kids these days. My kids are brought up with old music.

Yes, I feel much the same. Even if everything always went back to the elite, in terms of who owns the institutions, without question there was more scope and diversity readily available at one time.

Apparently when the tv talent show thing really took off in the early 00s, it wasn't universally welcomed in all the record companies. They'd be getting lots of kids who were essentially karaoke chancers that really had no vision nor direction.

I'm struck by how samey everything sounds now. Little or no risks taken.

JumpRogue 25-03-2018 10:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by decode reality (Post 1063010378)
It's impossible to really draw a line that separates the pop music of an era gone and that of the present. Though one of the most noticeable differences between popular music I would roughly say up to the mid 90s, and that of the 21st century (including late 90s) is the way originality is less prized.

Music is often painted as serving an elite agenda and nothing else, a perception that unfairly tars all music with the same brush, and throws the baby out with the bathwater. The truth is, in order to get the attention of the audience, whether it was playing in a little pub, or being in the limelight, you had to have your own material, first of all. The material had to have something about it that made it stand out.

Long before the millennial vogue for tribute acts, bands that played covers of top 40 songs used to be seen as cheesy and not the real deal. With less money in the music industry for most original artists (less venues, lower sales due to pirating, little returns from streaming), there's less incentive for musicians to pursue an original path.

What happened?

Originality is less prized, there is the line

hayed joe 25-03-2018 10:40 PM

Forgetting how conservative most musicians are as well.
"Uhh, that's self indulgent! Let's do my song that's basically the theme from Auf Wiedersehen Pet but with the lyrics changed to about smoking weed!,".

Although if it's original music you want, why not try my efforts involving a code fusing alphabet and fretboard to sing words that begin with the corresponding letter?
https://youtu.be/wgKsWeoSL3Y

I find both my actual voice AND the limits of Tablet technology!

andy1033 25-03-2018 10:45 PM

Maybe deals with the devil, are not as common now, lol

decode reality 26-03-2018 05:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hayed joe (Post 1063010440)
Forgetting how conservative most musicians are as well.
"Uhh, that's self indulgent! Let's do my song that's basically the theme from Auf Wiedersehen Pet but with the lyrics changed to about smoking weed!,".

Although if it's original music you want, why not try my efforts involving a code fusing alphabet and fretboard to sing words that begin with the corresponding letter?
https://youtu.be/wgKsWeoSL3Y

I find both my actual voice AND the limits of Tablet technology!

It reminded me of a mid-period Blur chord progression, actually! Even if that wasn't intended.

the tealady 26-03-2018 06:31 AM

I agree there is a real lack of originality from what I have heard. Modern music makes me feel angry. I cannot even listen to the electronically created sounds. Perhaps it is the way my brain is wired.

decode reality 26-03-2018 06:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the tealady (Post 1063010479)
I agree there is a real lack of originality from what I have heard. Modern music makes me feel angry. I cannot even listen to the electronically created sounds. Perhaps it is the way my brain is wired.

In the UK, it's played a lot in huge shopping centres/'shopping malls', even though the age group of shoppers isn't predominantly teenagers.

decode reality 26-03-2018 07:27 AM

The 1950s seems to be when popular music as we know it today had its beginnings. It was a blank canvas which meant there weren't as many preconceived ideas of how artists were expected to sound.

A lot of new record labels were also started by people who tended to be more music enthusiasts than business driven. So they were a bit more in tune with the art. No-one would dare to release something like 'Good Vibrations' or 'Bohemian Rhapsody' today.

It's important to bear in mind that we weren't saturated with music on the radio and television (and shops!) as we've become. In Britain there was only two tv channels for a long time; pop music could only be accessed by tuning into one pirate station (Radio Caroline) and one overseas station, Radio Luxembourg. Miles Davis, who's something of a by-word for originality said back in 1985 that in his youth he only owned a few records, and the fact that there was less music available enabled him, and many of his contemporary peers, to create an original sound by default. There was less to imitate. Mass communication technology has made music increasingly more available, but does quantity equal quality?

Culturally and politically, things were also in flux and upheaval in the 1960s, and that fed into the creativity. It's interesting that today we're experiencing just as much turbulence but it isn't mirrored in the music we hear. Or maybe it is, but not in a truly groundbreaking way.

iamawaveofthesea 26-03-2018 05:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by decode reality (Post 1063010430)
Centralisation is one aspect of it, as I've mentioned on other similar discussions of the topic, though I don't see it as the sole reason. There's also aesthetic, economic, sociological and technological factors to consider. Probably others.

cultural marxism will degrade everything

orwell told us this in his dystopian novel he wrote in 1948

you should expect it and you should also know that its all going to get much worse because people are still not getting that all of this is done by design

for as long as people don't realise there is a hidden hand steering all of this they won't seek to take that hand off the rudder, so we will continue on the same course

decode reality 27-03-2018 07:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by iamawaveofthesea (Post 1063010642)
cultural marxism will degrade everything

orwell told us this in his dystopian novel he wrote in 1948

you should expect it and you should also know that its all going to get much worse because people are still not getting that all of this is done by design

for as long as people don't realise there is a hidden hand steering all of this they won't seek to take that hand off the rudder, so we will continue on the same course

What specific role does cultural marxism play in terms of musical originality (or lack of it)?

What actual examples are there that demonstrate this influence at work?

Specific examples, not nebulous generalisations, by the way. Pinpoint something concrete.

By the way, if you're going to mention Orwell or anyone, make sure it's relevant to the thread topic, which is 'musical originality'. If it's tenuous or obviously unrelated, then please leave it out.

decode reality 27-03-2018 08:25 AM

This is about "musical originality".

You are an extremely dogmatic and dictatorial person, iamthewaveofthesea.
This isn't about "the Jews". This isn't about "cultural marxism". This isn't about YOU. If you want to discuss them, DO IT ON YOUR OWN THREADS!

If people can't write songs well, I consider anyone who says it's because of the Jews or cultural marxism to be extremely dogmatic at best, completely thick at worst.

This post isn't about you nor anyone else sneakily trying to conflate your views about Jewish people onto a topic. I can actually think of many Jewish people in music such as Chris Blackwell, Leiber and Stoller, Leonard Bernstein who don't fall under the template.

You see, you cannot go around this forum trying to change every single thread into something into something else. YOU are the one trying to shut other people down. Say what you want on the subject on your own threads, say what you want on my thread but make sure it is related, otherwise I will pull you up.

Post ANYTHING ELSE on this thread that's just an attempt to hijack the discussion, then I'll consider it spam and report you instantly.

Do not bother trying to argue this out, because your posts will be considered irrelevant to the discussion.

iamawaveofthesea 27-03-2018 08:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by decode reality (Post 1063010785)
This is about "musical originality".

You are an extremely dogmatic and dictatorial person, iamthewaveofthesea.
This isn't about "the Jews". This isn't about "cultural marxism". This isn't about YOU. If you want to discuss them, DO IT ON YOUR OWN THREADS!

If people can't write songs well, I consider anyone who says it's because of the Jews or cultural marxism to be extremely dogmatic at best, completely thick at worst.

This post isn't about you nor anyone else sneakily trying to conflate your views about Jewish people onto a topic. I can actually think of many Jewish people in music such as Chris Blackwell, Leiber and Stoller, Leonard Bernstein who don't fall under the template.

You see, you cannot go around this forum trying to change every single thread into something into something else. YOU are the one trying to shut other people down. Say what you want on the subject on your own threads, say what you want on my thread but make sure it is related, otherwise I will pull you up.

Post ANYTHING ELSE on this thread that's just an attempt to hijack the discussion, then I'll consider it spam and report you instantly.

Do not bother trying to argue this out, because your posts will be considered irrelevant to the discussion.

ok but this is a conspiracy forum so it is about discussing the conspiracy

its the same with book publishing for example

you could write a book about the conspiracy and you could fill it with great information that is all well documented. You could then send it to lots of big publishing firms but that doesn't mean they will publish it and if they don't publish it it doesn't get on the shop shelves and it doesn't reach the public. Do you see what i mean?

So if you have control over the publishing houses you can decide what books get onto the shop shelves

Its the same with music. if you control the record companies then you control what music gets onto the shelves and on the TV and on the radio

So the question of originality and the lack of it could come down to asking 'what music is being promoted and which is not?'

Are we saying there is no good music being written out there?

if there is then why is it not reaching the public?

you tell me....what's your theory about that?

I've told you mine and i didn't say it was 'the jews' i said it was powerful families like the rockefellers who control the industry

decode reality 27-03-2018 09:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by iamawaveofthesea (Post 1063010789)
ok but this is a conspiracy forum so it is about discussing the conspiracy

its the same with book publishing for example

you could write a book about the conspiracy and you could fill it with great information that is all well documented. You could then send it to lots of big publishing firms but that doesn't mean they will publish it and if they don't publish it it doesn't get on the shop shelves and it doesn't reach the public. Do you seem what i mean?

So if you have control over the publishing houses you can decide what books get onto the shop shelves

Its the same with music. if you control the record companies then you control what music gets onto the shelves and on the TV and on the radio

So the question of originality and the lack of it could come down to asking 'what music is being promoted and which is not?'

Are we saying there is no good music being written out there?

if there is then why is it not reaching the public?

you tell me....what's your theory about that?

Truth and 'conspiracy narrative' aren't always the same thing - sometimes they are completely different, regardless of how you define this forum. (Oh, and if you want to expand on that, start another thread rather than trying to derail this one.)

By the way, your response to my question didn't answer it but I somehow didn't expect it to.

iamawaveofthesea 27-03-2018 09:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by decode reality (Post 1063010378)
Music is often painted as serving an elite agenda and nothing else, a perception that unfairly tars all music with the same brush, and throws the baby out with the bathwater.

my answer to that is that it doesn't matter how much good music is made what matters is who controls the DISTRIBUTION and the EXHIBITION

The people who control those control what music reaches the public so its not that people tar all music with the same brush its that people are suspicious of music that IS promoted by the big corporations because they perceive the people behind those corporations as having an agenda. Some might say the only agenda is the pursuit of 'profit' but the conspiratorial worldview sees something deeper then mere profit hunting at work. not everyone can see this...yet

the conspiratorial world view, which i subscribe to, says that the cabal control distribution and exhibition and promote music that forwards their agenda

Its the same with what stalin said about elections: he said that it doesn't matter who does the voting, it only matters who does the counting

So if you control the electoral process then you can cook the figures. lets say that 60% of the public vote against you, but if you control the counting process you just tell the public that actually 60% of the public voted for you

How is anyone going to disprove that if there is no independent verification?

This is why people are warning against electronic voting because it can be easily rigged. its also why some people have questioned why ballot papers are ticked with pencils when pencil can be rubbed out

So lots of individuals can make music but what matters, like stalins elections, is who controls the platforms that music needs to reach a wider audience because they will get to decide what music the majority of the public get to hear because most people aren't exploring small venues and underground music magazines to seek out unpromoted gems. Most of the public rely on mainstream TV and radio and magazines for their pop culture diet and those are controlled by a handful of mega-corporations


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:11 PM.