Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Club for Open-Minded Discussion & Debate

[Stormcloud]

Ah, Sebastian Bach! When I listen to one of his Cantatas or particularly Stokowski's performance of Arioso I become spellbound. So beautiful!

[Thinking critical]

No I'm not preaching my opinion. On the otherhand you are preaching yours in saying that we should only listen to the Industry when it comes to 'illegal downloads' and pretend that they have no agenda in exaggerating the figures.

I'm not interested in the illegality of downloads, I don't know why the thought of it gets your ire and I don't care. I most definitely don't want to read your ill-informed views regarding them, so lets try to stay on topic.

You miss the point that we have to take into account all views/listens and critically assess how they fit into the picture in terms of "music reflecting society". So it's necessary to point out that (a) the figures are exaggerated and (b) we have no real idea of the impact of such downloaded music on the listener.

I have suggested that for the purpose of this discussion that it is more than reasonable to make a sharp distinction between the downloader, radio listener, Youtube viewer and | The 'fan' that goes to the effort of buying a CD, or seeing an act in concert and has clearly shown an allegiance to the 'artist'. Thus they can be seen as identifying strongly enough with the act for it to be considered a reflection of them.

I made a major typo in the post you replied to, not sure if you picked it up or not. Anyway, as I said that's you're opinion and mine is the opposite and I don't see the point in arguing them. You think real music fans by CD's and attend concerts; well I know a heap of music nutters that just down load because it's free, that's there agenda free music. Me personally I own a couple hundred CD's because I like showing of my collection and am somewhat illiterate when it comes to downloading music. On the other hand I don't go to concerts because I haven't got the patience for large crowds.

So if you feel that record sales and ticket sales gives an accurate account of current music trends in our society, good for you, I just happen to believe mainstream music creates a bias because the songs have been specifically made to attract a certain listener, mainly 13 - 25 year olds (or thereabouts) so it's a bias sample and it doesn't give an accurate reflection of it's influence if any towards society. Here's a link regarding the cost of piracy. http://www.riaa.com/physicalpiracy.php? ... ils_online

What agenda has record labels got for exaggerating the drop in sales figures since I-pods game on the scene? And I wasn't preaching we should listen to anyone, I was simply pointing out a common fact, a heap of people I'd hate to think how many do not pay for music, so how can anyone obtain accurate figures as such.

[Pastabake]

So if you feel that record sales and ticket sales gives an accurate account of current music trends in our society, good for you, I just happen to believe mainstream music creates a bias because the songs have been specifically made to attract a certain listener, mainly 13 - 25 year olds (or thereabouts) so it's a bias sample and it doesn't give an accurate reflection of it's influence if any towards society.

Ironic then that you seem to be agreeing with me. Perhaps you didn't really understand what I was getting at and instead got caught up in record sales, concert tickets and illegal downloads?

Here's a link regarding the cost of piracy. http://www.riaa.com/physicalpiracy.php? ... ils_online

Yes I too think that the best place to get unbiased figures is always going to be from those with a vested interest.

While most people are happy to take something that's free even if they don't really want it ... getting them to pay for stuff is a completely different matter. Perhaps that's why the biggest buyers (age 45+) of music today are the very people that (a) Have the money to spend and (b) are buying catalogue music, stuff that they know they like and NOT the heavily marketed hyped up pop **** that tops the lists of the most illegally downloaded music. I also suggested that the people buying the majority of music, this 45+ age group, are also potentially not buying it because it reflects their sentiments in as much as it's an exercise in nostalgia.

so how can anyone obtain accurate figures as such

Exactly, which is why we have to think critically about the whole picture.

The point I was making all along is that music is so fractured into genres, the artists careers so fleeting that unlike in the past where music could be said to reflect a significant section of society, today we can't really say that any one 'music' reflects society ... even if our relationship towards music might reflect it.

[Universal Knowledge]

I don't know how these connections sometimes creep in but when listening to the Grosse Fuge by Beethoven it registers like a metaphor in sound for String Theory. Most of his Late Quartets in fact come across that way. It feels as if a spirit is being created at the same time as the universe.

[PAM]

Is music a reflection of society? Or does it lead society? Or both? If so then what does this tell us about our own society?

Most of the popular music nowadays is either:

1) people rapping about sex and drugs. 2) people singing about sex and drugs. 3) people singing about crashing cars into bridges. 4) people rapping or singing about partying.

Of course most of these people have little to no talent and dress like sluts or "gangsters". There are some artists that are talented and write good music, but those are not as popular and numerable.

So what say you?

I'm having a problem with some of your questions.

Music must surely reflect society and also influence society. It depends. You can't be talking about society as a whole because not all the members of any society listen to the same kinds of music. It seems, from the rest of your post, you mean, specifically, young people and pop music.

The use of the word "society" is always suspect. Are you on about old grannies in a old folks' home or members of a black gang in Alum Rock? They are both part of British society but I doubt they listen to the same music.

I think you are correct about 'most' pop music being about sex, drugs and stuff. Then again, that has been the case since the 1950s or even before that. Not sure about people crashing cars into bridges though. Though there was a lot of car-driving and crashing cultures in the 1950s - think of James Dean.

Perhaps it's unrealistic to expect pop music to be about other things such as quantum mechanics, abortion and 18th century Kantian philosophy. One point of pop music, surely, is that it not about these kinds of thing. If you want to think about other things, then don't listen too much to pop music. Then again, I suppose that in theory pop music could be about quantum mechanics or daffodils and there is, for example, a lot of Christian pop/rock music and also intellectualist rock, etc. In other words, if you truly want something different, go look for it because it exists.

[Belinda]

Commercial pop reflects the world but some of the popular genres can change the world if the will is there to do so e.g. ***** Riot.

[Pastabake]

I'm not sure you can call that music ... great political statement though. Funny though how the church sprang back so quickly, almost as if it had never gone away.

-- Updated December 23rd, 2013, 7:26 pm to add the following --

Good news that they've just been released from prison.

[Sy Borg]

I am a musician who has always played independent music. My focus is actually quite prosaic - get in the zone, work in partnership with other musicians in the band, support singers and players when they are featuring, etc.

More broadly, music obviously reflects society in all its various angles and subcultures. How can it not? In turn, the music we hear influences us. It's a feedback loop.

I guess the non commercial side of the music scene reflects those of us hoping for more creative nourishment than "baby lets do it yeah doof doof doof doof" [sic]. Music is, after all, informational nourishment, perhaps reflecting life's temporary triumph over entropy. We have glossy commercial junk food, healthy jazz and classical food than only a few of us enjoy, and all the grades in between. Different people need different nutrients too.

Even the structure of bands reflects hierarchies, with leaders (vocalists and soloists) and staff (accompanists). Many experimental music artists tend towards the left and strongly reject what they see as most forms of music reinforcing hierarchies and their inequities, ie. they are looking at art's feedback loop.

When multinats use their contacts and resources to influence major distribution and promotion channels to push their synthetic music-like products, that reflects an aspect of society too - the use of strength for competitive advantage. (It should be said that dinosaurs had worked that one out 300mill years ago so that aspect could be said to reflect natural law, which is reflected in society and from there it's reflected in the works of society).

When production houses replace musicians with sequencers to save money, that reflects the increasing rationalisation of industry due to global competitive pressures. It also reflects the pressure the music industry is other with the rise of video, gaming and reality shows.

The varieties of music and the places where it's available reflects the different cultures and subcultures in society.

The shift from organic music that "breathes" to machine-perfect, "on the grid" music generated by sequencers talks to us of greater tech integration in society. Young people have been raised on sequencer-generated music and many dislike old organic music played by responsive musicians and consider it "messy". Times are a'changin'.

Technology is increasingly becoming integrated into our lives and, consequently, our arts. Physical skills will increasingly be replaces by mental ones.

Sorry, the post is longer than I intended but this topic obviously interests me.

[Budding Old Geeser]

I am a avid music listener, and piss-poor musician. I almost never sit in silence. I think more clearly with some music playing in the background.

In general, I would agree with the other respondents that have stated that music is a reflection of the composer or writer, while adding, who has of course has been influenced by society.

Popular music, on the local radio stations, is more of a reflection of the local demographic. If you live in an inner-city type of urban area, you will find much more Rap than you would in say, mid-state Illinois.

When traveling the roads of America, I could almost guess the distance to a metropolitan area by what is available on the FM radio dial. In Southern California you could expect to find about six Rock stations, six Rap or Pop stations, and one or two Country stations along with one Classical Music station, maybe, depending on where exactly you are at the time, one Techno station and maybe one Talk Radio, and no Religion.

Here in mid-state Illinois, you are likely to find two or three each Rock and Country Music stations, three or four Religious-type Talk Radio stations, one Agricultural Talk Radio, one Classical Music, and one Rap/Pop station. When I do listen to the radio, I prefer to listen to Sirius/XM (satellite radio). This way I can listen to the same stations I have found that appeal to my tastes, regardless of where I go.

At home I have some ~80,000 digitized songs available at my finger tips on a dedicated hard drive. With a few clicks of the mouse I can easily cue up albums and different genres, depending on my mood, while browsing the net, corresponding, or otherwise working on the computer. I never listen to what some radio station is trying to feed me. I also don’t like commercials or news on the radio.

I have to admit, and my (grown) kids will confirm, that I am not the most up-to-date listener around, especially when it comes to Popular and Rap music (I don’t like much of it).

The actual point I am making I guess, is that the music we listen to is more a reflection of us.

[Belinda]

Yes, and "us" is society not so?

[Hog Rider]

Is music a reflection of society? Or does it lead society? Or both? If so then what does this tell us about our own society?

Most of the popular music nowadays is either:

1) people rapping about sex and drugs. 2) people singing about sex and drugs. 3) people singing about crashing cars into bridges. 4) people rapping or singing about partying.

Of course most of these people have little to no talent and dress like sluts or "gangsters". There are some artists that are talented and write good music, but those are not as popular and numerable.

So what say you?

I think the only way to ask this question is "To what degree does particular pieces of music have meaning to society; or affect and reflect society." As all music is the product of individuals and groups within society; what they produce both influences and is influenced by the society on which they live. But not all music has the same effect, or has been influenced by society to the same degree.

Music is not an homogenous whole which can be simply read off against a question such as the way it is formulated here.

Compare "jingle Bells", with Beethoven's Ninth, or "All you Need is Love" by Lennon and McCartney.

To address your "Gansta Rap" there is no doubt that kids will be influenced and feel a sense of entitlement to repeat that attitude and language they hear. There is no doubt about that at all.

[Sy Borg]

Is music a reflection of society? Or does it lead society? Or both? If so then what does this tell us about our own society?

Most of the popular music nowadays is either:

1) people rapping about sex and drugs. 2) people singing about sex and drugs. 3) people singing about crashing cars into bridges. 4) people rapping or singing about partying.

Of course most of these people have little to no talent and dress like sluts or "gangsters". There are some artists that are talented and write good music, but those are not as popular and numerable.

So what say you?

Everything is a reflection of everything else.

Yep, although you need to look out for the fun house mirrors

Music is a form of communication and in much communication there are feedback loops - music reflects back at us the artists' conception of us while we take on the information provided by that reflection, which will influence us in widely varying degrees.

It's amusing how older people always complain about the vacuousness, superficiality, insensitivity and lack of talent in new artists, as though this is something new. Old codgers complained about Wagner and they have whined and moaned about the many flaws of young people and their inventions continuously since. Old complainers were in ancient Rome and Greece. I imagine this dynamic would date back to ancient tribal societies and maybe analogous activities in other group animals as well ...

Old grumblers do actually have some valid points. We become more crowded with humans and our noisy machines we become louder and less sensitive, and this is reflected back in the music, especially in the commercial arena. Think of the arts as the ocean - commercial art are the waves and froth - AM radio, advertising graphics. Far below, the depths are timeless and are expressed in all eras. If you're looking on this kind of depth on the radio, you'll need to know the obscure channels or maybe just go to YouTube.

Another point is that music varies in its degree of expression of the society around it. I'd like to take a piece as an example, Max Roach Quintet's Driva Man, with Abbey Lincoln on vocals: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DYLRusne_7o

Not only a reflection of the time and place but also a historical perspective, with impressionist, expressionist, modernist and postmodern angles. In turn the reflection the music gives has the power to raise awareness and influence.

Meanwhile, Grandmaster Flash's, The Message in the 80s was equally powerful and thoughtful http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYMkEMCHtJ4 ... of course, being an old biddy myself, I find the jazz piece more sophisticated, sensitive, rich and skilful

[Hog Rider]

(Nested quote removed.)


Everything is a reflection of everything else.

Yep, although you need to look out for the fun house mirrors

Music is a form of communication and in much communication there are feedback loops - music reflects back at us the artists' conception of us while we take on the information provided by that reflection, which will influence us in widely varying degrees.

It's amusing how older people always complain about the vacuousness, superficiality, insensitivity and lack of talent in new artists, as though this is something new. Old codgers complained about Wagner and they have whined and moaned about the many flaws of young people and their inventions continuously since. Old complainers were in ancient Rome and Greece. I imagine this dynamic would date back to ancient tribal societies and maybe analogous activities in other group animals as well ...

Old grumblers do actually have some valid points. We become more crowded with humans and our noisy machines we become louder and less sensitive, and this is reflected back in the music, especially in the commercial arena. Think of the arts as the ocean - commercial art are the waves and froth - AM radio, advertising graphics. Far below, the depths are timeless and are expressed in all eras. If you're looking on this kind of depth on the radio, you'll need to know the obscure channels or maybe just go to YouTube.

Another point is that music varies in its degree of expression of the society around it. I'd like to take a piece as an example, Max Roach Quintet's Driva Man, with Abbey Lincoln on vocals: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DYLRusne_7o

Not only a reflection of the time and place but also a historical perspective, with impressionist, expressionist, modernist and postmodern angles. In turn the reflection the music gives has the power to raise awareness and influence.

Meanwhile, Grandmaster Flash's, The Message in the 80s was equally powerful and thoughtful http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYMkEMCHtJ4 ... of course, being an old biddy myself, I find the jazz piece more sophisticated, sensitive, rich and skilful

You complaint about "old codgers" is an empty caricature. Fact is that music has declined and become more popularitist. That is not to say that it gets better and better the further back you go; nor worse as you move forward in time. There are high spots and low spots. Beethoven represents the apogee of the symphonic form. There are few symphonies that mange to match or challenge the greatest of his work, despite there being 200 years gone by, but those that preceeded him were not so good. Mozart, for example wrote over 40 symphonies, none has the majesty and grandeur of Beethoven. In the 20thC, post war Jazz reached new heights of excellence influencing the progressive rock movement which rose to great heights of virtuosity only to be torn down by the base instrument bashing Punk. A lot has been lost since the 1970s, and few bands have managed to reach the technical brilliance of some of the prof-rock bands, even those bands have failed to match their own history, succumbing to the fashions of music which demand the lowest common denominator of popular appeal. Compare....

WITH

OR THIS

With

YILPxHY0ZaA

The first examples are the bands at their best, the second albums are good to listen to but are more like bubble gum - they soon lose their flavour and you have to spit them out. These bands have replaced something that is a little challenging for something with instant appeal that has no legs.

I can listen to early YES and ELO still, coming back to them as the years pass, the later stuff is just boring.

This seem to be a common enough process. At the grand old age of 40ish I liked Goldfrapp, but they too have gone the way of easy-listening instant appeal boring, middle of the road pulp.

So it's not just the case of old is good new is bad.

[Sy Borg]

You complaint about "old codgers" is an empty caricature. Fact is that music has declined and become more popularitist. That is not to say that it gets better and better the further back you go; nor worse as you move forward in time. There are high spots and low spots. Beethoven represents the apogee of the symphonic form. There are few symphonies that mange to match or challenge the greatest of his work, despite there being 200 years gone by, but those that preceeded him were not so good. Mozart, for example wrote over 40 symphonies, none has the majesty and grandeur of Beethoven. In the 20thC, post war Jazz reached new heights of excellence influencing the progressive rock movement which rose to great heights of virtuosity only to be torn down by the base instrument bashing Punk. A lot has been lost since the 1970s, and few bands have managed to reach the technical brilliance of some of the prof-rock bands, even those bands have failed to match their own history, succumbing to the fashions of music which demand the lowest common denominator of popular appeal.

Et tu, Hoggy? Yet another dagger in my sensitive heart after the Christian assault I've recently endured - you need a hide like a rhino around here

You may notice that I referred to myself as an old biddy. Admit it, Hog - old people have always whined about the next generation's music.

I've tried hard to remain open minded. It's difficult because my youthful "programming" tells me what values to look for in "good music", and my programming rebels at new music that does not conform to my old notions of what is "good". Musical values, like other values, have a largely immutable core within a dynamic periphery. I made a conscious decision to acclimatise rather than judge, though I still usually listen to jazz We are not objective observers, not even you, Hogfather.

You will notice these days an increasing transfer of skills from physical mastery to mastery of machines. I've done a bit of both and each is a lot harder than it looks. It's not a loss of talent today but different talents. That's certainly a reflection of the broader society.

There is also an opposite movement found in modern metal and (ironically) hip hop where they push the physical skill levels to exaggerated levels, a bit like the way horror movies have increasingly pushed gore limits. These two seemingly opposite dynamics each achieve the same thing - pushing the envelope and avoiding copying the past. I'd call that a job description for each new generation.

I too loved prog in the 70s. I had "Close to the Edge" and a bunch of King Crimson's LPs too (their psychotic introversion resonated with me at the time, especially LTIA). However, prog's instrumental "virtuosity" too often seemed like showing off for showing off's sake. They could have used their abilities to be more articulate rather than more complicated, choosing impression over expression.

Ego was prog's downfall, or at least opened the doors for their dismissal by the combined pressure of journalists and suits. The same thing happened to fusion, which started as a transcendent art form and ended up as elevator music once the suits got hold of it. As Robert Fripp, King Crimson's founder observed, in the mid 80s (I think 1985) the MUSIC business became the music BUSINESS. Again, seemingly reflective of broader society at the time.

That spelled the end of the golden era of rock, back when fans would dedicate time to purely listen to music. Now young people (broadly speaking) seek more visual, less cerebral and active pastimes like gaming and reality shows, where music just serves as a backdrop and social lubricant. Even the big concerts tend to be at least as visual as musical.

Does that make the expression of sincere musicians today inferior to the efforts of previous times? I think not.

In the old says you could listen to mainstream stations and there'd be some pearls amongst the swine. You can't do that now because there are very few "pearls" and the "swine" are now loud, brash, in your face, ultra-compressed hogs designed for maximum loudness to make a greater impression than the next songs. Yet again, that reflects the increasing competition in society as population increases.

If you want to find good modern music (that does exist) you have to actively search - it will rarely come to you.

[Hog Rider]

" Admit it, Hog - old people have always whined about the next generation's music. "

No. As I said this is a caricature.

If I was taking from the perspective of 1974, I;d be saying that music was doing very well, much better than what it replaced. I fI was taking from the POV of 1812 listening to Beethoven I'd be saying that music has improved. The fact is that music has highs and lows, depending on what you think makes "good music".

To an ABBA lover I'm sure all that nasty prog rock was just crap. For me music that lasts and keeps me interested has to have virtuosity. Billy Cobham is still out there making great music. He is an example of an ever improving skill at the drums and a widening of taste and genre. He is better now than in the past (though Spectrum is a monument that will be hard to surpass) in general terms he is as good as ever. But there is a phenomenon of bands commercialising, as above. And sadly that does tend to reduce the quality of the music. Some old people get stuck in a particular time, and young persons music is no longer relevant to them, true. But most 'old codgers', like me that I know are always on the look out for new music. Sometimes they look back wards other times they look at the now. There is always great things to find, as well as lots of rubbish.

-- Updated February 2nd, 2014, 8:29 am to add the following --

In the old says you could listen to mainstream stations and there'd be some pearls amongst the swine. You can't do that now because there are very few "pearls" and the "swine" are now loud, brash, in your face, ultra-compressed hogs designed for maximum loudness to make a greater impression than the next songs. Yet again, that reflects the increasing competition in society as population increases.

If you want to find good modern music (that does exist) you have to actively search - it will rarely come to you.

We live in a completely different environment today. When I was first buying music I trawled the second hand music chops in Brighton so I could afford to get such gems as "The Yes Album", "Physical Graffiti". Then it was about the pleasure of the album artwork; skinning up a joint on the cover whilst properly sitting down and listening. The TV had one weekly show; TOTP, which did the general Chart for singles, and the odd concert show. The good music was on the Old Grey Whistle Test, which featured the Album bands. Later "The Tube" took up the mantle of interesting music.

Now the choice is wider but the mainstream has control of the TV, and dedicated music channels seek only the most bland and popular choices. Buying music comes in a bewildering array of forms, and the media is no longer physical. The ritual of the unpacking and placing in record or CD is gone.

But music includes good and bad as it has always done. Getting old is more about having heard so much that finding something truly new is increasingly difficult.