Jump to content

What Is Pop Music?

Thfcliam

By Thfcliam
in All About the SOUL

 Share

Recommended Posts

Thfcliam Regular

Thfcliam

Posted
Posted

So I have been arguing with the guys at work about what pop music is, they listen to radio one and like most of the current music in the charts

I think most of the stuff radio one play is pop music, it is popular commercial music, I hate how they say music in the charts is a certain genre like alot of stuff they like they say is rnb which it is clearly not, yes I accept music has changed and evolved but the music they class as certain genres is Cleary wrong for example Chase and status they class them as drum n bass, yes they do different genres such as drum n bass, house etc in their music but it is all commercial drum n bass etc I wouldn't class it as drum n bass it is more pop surely? Drum n bass is more a underground and I respect that, Another example is eminem yes he is rap but he is commercial rap and more pop IMO

Also alot of the songs in the charts today are trying to have that kind of 70s feel and bit soulful but that doesn't make them soul does it? It is pop

It is the same with soul and Motown yes you could class as pop, Diana Ross, temptations, four tops etc they all had pop songs in the charts but that's why we love northern soul because it was artists trying to be like them but just not classed as good enough and not the right sound which wouldn't get played on the radio as such In America at that time? Am I correct?

So what is pop? Are they correct to say Im not with it and living in the past?

Link to comment
Social source share
  • Replies 51
  • Views 3.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Most active in this topic

Most active in this topic

Popular Posts

Staceys Dad
Staceys Dad

  i told my daughter i was trendy.... as i danced to her music... .she gave me the LOOK the wife gives me...we all know THE LOOK....            bloody women...

Pete Eccles
Pete Eccles

Everything you mention is 'pop' music, except Northern soul which is mainly failed 'pop' music

Daved
Daved

  Why? They're different somgs which just have the same title?   Also, it sounds nothing like William Bell

Soul-slider Veteran

Soul-slider

Posted
Posted (edited)

I notice the 'Mod' look seems a bit trendy these days with young people and that goes back to the early 1960's!!!. I guess everything is trendy in it's own way, even 'geeky chic' like me :D  

I notice in your avatar that you are fairly young? so you will be more of a target for 'old fashioned' criticism by your young mates.  

I do know that Soul will always be trendy be it old or contemporary.

Edited by Soul-Slider
Link to comment
Social source share
Thfcliam Regular

Thfcliam

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I notice the 'Mod' look seems a bit trendy these days with young people and that goes back to the early 1960's!!!. I guess everything is trendy in it's own way, even 'geeky chic' like me :D  

I do know that Soul will always be trendy be it old or contemparary.

Exactly I think liking soul and dancing to it is trendy, well I would much rather be doing that then listening to that crap ive got to listen to on the radio all day!

Link to comment
Social source share
Thfcliam Regular

Thfcliam

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Some Northern Soul really does stand the test of time and would fit in a treat on some 20 year old's i-pod but there are some that can sound very dated indeed. There's nothing like a good raw soulful vocal and it is still used very much in today's music.

The only recent stuff I liked was Raphael Sadiq and they dont play him in the charts

  • Helpful 1
Link to comment
Social source share
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted

Everything you mention is 'pop' music, except Northern soul which is mainly failed 'pop' music :)

Failed at being pop music because it is too good! :)

Link to comment
Social source share
Thfcliam Regular

Thfcliam

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

I'm sure that will be of great comfort to the artists that strived to be 'pop stars' but failed....... be

cause they were too good

But most of them could of been pop stars that's the thing!They literally were too Good!! Edited by thfcliam
Link to comment
Social source share
Thfcliam Regular

Thfcliam

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

Lot's of 'them' were, the rest of 'them' wanted to be.....but failed,

I guess thats why we love them so much they could of and should of made it but didn't but it doesent mean they failed because we love there music

Edited by thfcliam
Link to comment
Social source share

Guest Gogs

Guest Gogs

Posted
Posted

...bit like why I support Spurs  :huh:

I take it that that's like supporting Hearts in Scotland, fortunately i can always fall back on my "soul" records for comfort.

Link to comment
Social source share
Daved Veteran

Daved

Posted
Posted

Had to laugh in the pub Xmas night a young lad said pharrel was a great record and he checked out velvet hammer via youtube and said he didn't like it at all, i suggested he went and got his hearing checked out :)

 

Why? They're different somgs which just have the same title?

 

Also, it sounds nothing like William Bell

  • Helpful 2
Link to comment
Social source share
jam66 Regular

jam66

Posted
Posted

Slightly tongue in cheek but the origins of how and what we view as pop could perhaps be traced back to Strauss and how his concerts were rammed with people frantic fighting get in as they couldn't hear him anywhere else lol, sound familiar? Ladies all light headed and fainting over the maestro. Lovely as I've no doubt you are Northern Jocks glad we left that bit behind.  :rofl:

Link to comment
Social source share
Mark S Long Time

Mark S

Posted
Posted

Definitive answer - Pharrel Williams - Happy = pop

 

                           Velvet Hammer - Happy = poop

 

                           William Bell - Happy = propper soul music

 

 

:P  :P now behave you lot :thumbsup:

  • Helpful 2
Link to comment
Social source share
Mark S Long Time

Mark S

Posted
Posted

If William Bell's "Happy" had hit No.1 then would it have been perceived as a Pop record I wonder....?

Ian D :)

 

Probably would but it doesnt alter the fact that it is a quality soul record that has stood the test of time in our circles at least .

Link to comment
Social source share
Guest penny

Guest penny

Posted
Posted

So I have been arguing with the guys at work about whif it was a hit.t pop music is, they listen to radio one and like most of the current music in the charts

I think most of the stuff radio one play is pop music, it is popular commercial music, I hate how they say music in the charts is a certain genre like alot of stuff they like they say is rnb which it is clearly not, yes I accept music has changed and evolved but the music they class as certain genres is Cleary wrong for example Chase and status they class them as drum n bass, yes they do different genres such as drum n bass, house etc in their music but it is all commercial drum n bass etc I wouldn't class it as drum n bass it is more pop surely? Drum n bass is more a underground and I respect that, Another example is eminem yes he is rap but he is commercial rap and more pop IMO

Also alot of the songs in the charts today are trying to have that kind of 70s feel and bit soulful but that doesn't make them soul does it? It is pop

It is the same with soul and Motown yes you could class as pop, Diana Ross, temptations, four tops etc they all had pop songs in the charts but that's why we love northern soul because it was artists trying to be like them but just not classed as good enough and not the right sound which wouldn't get played on the radio as such In America at that time? Am I correct?

So what is pop? Are they correct to say Im not with it and living in the past?

I've always understood the term pop music to mean music that was made with the intention of appealing to the masses, including the people who dont particularly like music.

A lot of artists main intention when making music actually isnt commercial success, and this music is more likely to be useful - like dance music, or experimental, like jazz, or simply for the love of music, or desire to express.

.

so by that definition, i'd say some northern soul is pop music which failed in it's objective to achieve the commercial sucess of the four tops or whoever. Some of it isnt - it's just the hip sound of the culture it came from.

i'd say that funk and r&b were more the latter.

so something like dana valery is pop - just very good pop - despite not being a hit, yet 'green onions' is not pop, even though it sold a million.

Clearly pop doesnt just describe anything that becomes popular, otherwise a jazz track would have to change genre if it was a hit.

thats my understanding of it.I

Link to comment
Social source share
Paddy Ferry Long Time

Paddy Ferry

Posted
Posted

I think it is one of better ones on the Radio but wouldn't say I really like it.

Can't say I'm struck by it , the other half loves it and I think it's a whole lot better than a proper pop song Tribute, by the way a 7" single of Happy, P Williams went for £51 on Sunday, clearly some do like it.

Link to comment
Social source share
Guest penny

Guest penny

Posted
Posted

I'm sure that will be of great comfort to the artists that strived to be 'pop stars' but failed....... because they were too good

They probably will. Most musicians would chose to make the music they loved and felt and be appreciated by people who love musuc, rather than compromise that for success. If that wasnt the case all these very talented soul, funk, r&b and jazz artists wouldnt have made all this hardcore stuff and replicated monkees records instead.

Incredible as it sounds nowadays, some people love music, take it seriously, and commercial success is secondary to that, a welcome bonus if it comes.

personally, I'd take a lot of comfort from the fact that I was good at the expence of being popular

Link to comment
Social source share

Pete Eccles Veteran

Pete Eccles

Posted
Posted (edited)

They probably will. Most musicians would chose to make the music they loved and felt and be appreciated by people who love musuc, rather than compromise that for success. If that wasnt the case all these very talented soul, funk, r&b and jazz artists wouldnt have made all this hardcore stuff and replicated monkees records instead.

Incredible as it sounds nowadays, some people love music, take it seriously, and commercial success is secondary to that, a welcome bonus if it comes.

personally, I'd take a lot of comfort from the fact that I was good at the expence of being popular

 

 

Again a nice thought,

 

Unfortunately I don't quite buy it sorry, a lot of the artists we love didn't try and replicate the Monkees, this is true, instead it is widely accepted by more knowledgeable people than either of us that they were often trying to replicate the 'Motown sound', which I think we can agree was very successful (popular music), but for many reasons (not necessarily quality) didn't quite manage it and failed, but we love them all the same, in some cases more than.......

 

As for the Monkees, I'm sure many, just as talented artists, did try to replicate them, especially at the height of their success, unfortunately (or fortunately which ever way you look at it) many of these were also failed 'pop stars',

 

Being good and skint wouldn't put food on the table, in a time when being a successful 'pop star' was one of very few opportunities to 'escape' for many of these artists,

Edited by Pete60
Link to comment
Social source share
Godzilla Veteran

Godzilla

Posted
Posted

All the proper musicians that I know tend to follow the pay cheque first of all and if it's something artistically pleasing, well that's a bonus. I guess it's like being a plumber: you just try do do a good job and get paid for it. If it's an interesting project à la Grand Designs that you're working on, sure, that's nice, but at the end of the day it's all about the pipes.

  • Helpful 1
Link to comment
Social source share
Guest penny

Guest penny

Posted
Posted

Again a nice thought,

 

Unfortunately I don't quite buy it sorry, a lot of the artists we love didn't try and replicate the Monkees, this is true, instead it is widely accepted by more knowledgeable people than either of us that they were often trying to replicate the 'Motown sound', which I think we can agree was very successful (popular music), but for many reasons (not necessarily quality) didn't quite manage it and failed, but we love them all the same, in some cases more than.......

 

As for the Monkees, I'm sure many, just as talented artists, did try to replicate them, especially at the height of their success, unfortunately (or fortunately which ever way you look at it) many of these were also failed 'pop stars',

 

Being good and skint wouldn't put food on the table, in a time when being a successful 'pop star' was one of very few opportunities to 'escape' for many of these artists,

I get your point, but the world of soul doesnt begin and end with people trying to copy motown's hits, my world of soul certainly doesnt. Wasnt the point that motown deliberately aimed it's product at a mainstream crossover audience, whereas the black community often wanted something more gritty and authentic? Some artists would have deliberately rejected motown's pop sound and made records for the culture they were part of, like, say, dance music artists in the 90s.

and back then, musicians who we think of as being disasterous failures, were often legends in the communities and earnt a good living / lifestyle as professional musicians, which is often as far as you can get unless you get a track take off or you water down your music.

I dont like 50s / 60s / 70s soul because it sounds like hits, motown or otherwise, i like it cos it doesnt sound like hits - the good stuff is way too intense, passionate or cool to appeal to your middle of the road music buyer.

even now, a record like soul city 'cold hearted blues', just as an example, is as alien in it's intensity to your average pop fan as some hardcore hip hop.

I think the genius of motown was in making hits that werent entirely bland, but a lot of that was just the era - you'd get some quite cool music in the charts in more exciting eras, the 90s was similar with all the house and hip hop in the charts.

Link to comment
Social source share
Pete Eccles Veteran

Pete Eccles

Posted
Posted

I get your point, but the world of soul doesnt begin and end with people trying to copy motown's hits, my world of soul certainly doesnt. Wasnt the point that motown deliberately aimed it's product at a mainstream crossover audience, whereas the black community often wanted something more gritty and authentic? Some artists would have deliberately rejected motown's pop sound and made records for the culture they were part of, like, say, dance music artists in the 90s.

and back then, musicians who we think of as being disasterous failures, were often legends in the communities and earnt a good living / lifestyle as professional musicians, which is often as far as you can get unless you get a track take off or you water down your music.

I dont like 50s / 60s / 70s soul because it sounds like hits, motown or otherwise, i like it cos it doesnt sound like hits - the good stuff is way too intense, passionate or cool to appeal to your middle of the road music buyer.

even now, a record like soul city 'cold hearted blues', just as an example, is as alien in it's intensity to your average pop fan as some hardcore hip hop.

I think the genius of motown was in making hits that werent entirely bland, but a lot of that was just the era - you'd get some quite cool music in the charts in more exciting eras, the 90s was similar with all the house and hip hop in the charts.

 

But I think house and hip hop are shite in the main, I'm no big fan of anything 90's, similarly the artists in the 60's that aimed their product at the masses but missed by miles would have been perceived by those masses as shite, I/we loved em, 

 

Just because we loved them but they failed doesn't mean they weren't trying, unless that thought makes you feel better, then that's fair enough,

 

We obviously have a different opinion and that's fine also

Link to comment
Social source share
Guest penny

Guest penny

Posted
Posted

All the proper musicians that I know tend to follow the pay cheque first of all and if it's something artistically pleasing, well that's a bonus. I guess it's like being a plumber: you just try do do a good job and get paid for it. If it's an interesting project à la Grand Designs that you're working on, sure, that's nice, but at the end of the day it's all about the pipes.

yes, but back the your bread and butter work for a pro musician could still be pretty close to what they liked - an r&b loving musician in the 50s could probably spend most of his or her working life playing on r&b records

anyway, were not talking pro musicians here, were talking about artists releasing records. If all they wanted was success we wouldn't have all the hardcore dance records that we do.

maybe it's my perspective, northern soul isnt where I come at black music. I grew up with r&b, jazz and funk, much of which was definitely not aimed at mainstream success.

like all good eras in music, people made the music they were hearing at grass roots level - folk music of sorts. An underground hit in their own circles would do nicely. The jamaican scene in the early 60s is a good example of this.

Link to comment
Social source share
Godzilla Veteran

Godzilla

Posted
Posted

I think you're revising history with an  exotisised slant that suits your beliefs. I struggle to accept that the artists and musicians in those communities you speak of wouldn't want radio hits, record sales, more fans and wouldn't turn their noses up at better deals, bigger shows. It's possible to love the music you make and still want to successful and I doubt many people deliberately used to set out to be cult figures.

Link to comment
Social source share
Guest penny

Guest penny

Posted
Posted

But I think house and hip hop are shite in the main, I'm no big fan of anything 90's, similarly the artists in the 60's that aimed their product at the masses but missed by miles would have been perceived by those masses as shite, I/we loved em, 

 

Just because we loved them but they failed doesn't mean they weren't trying, unless that thought makes you feel better, then that's fair enough,

 

We obviously have a different opinion and that's fine also

failed at what? So new orleans r&b wasn't folk music, made to sell to the culture it came from? It was actually failed attempts at elvis records? Remember, these cultures were making music and records before anyone had had a hit in these styles, why were they doing it?

Your scale of success and failure is strictly commercial, and while this is the common view of life these days, I assure you that not everyone thinks like that. Dont know why the thought of people making music cos they like it outrages you so much!

I made records in the 90s, I 100% had no desire to have a pop hit but was making music for underground scenes. I couldnt give a fuck about fame and mainstream success, if I did I'd have tried starting a boy band.

even when I was making money, I wasnt doing anything in order to make money. I cant be the only one.

Link to comment
Social source share
Guest penny

Guest penny

Posted
Posted

I think you're revising history with an  exotisised slant that suits your beliefs. I struggle to accept that the artists and musicians in those communities you speak of wouldn't want radio hits, record sales, more fans and wouldn't turn their noses up at better deals, bigger shows. It's possible to love the music you make and still want to successful and I doubt many people deliberately used to set out to be cult figures.

no, your mistaken. I'm talking about intention. I might intend to make some cool music that I love, and nothing else. It then might transpire that my work, once made, somehow appeals to the masses, and I get hits, records sales, more fans etc.

I wouldnt turn it down, why would I? But that doesnt mean that my intention was those things all along, in fact it wasnt.

so john coltrane and co werent dreaming of mainstream success when they started abandoning arrangements and time signatures, they were making music they felt like making. Just like booker t and the mgs were making r&b instrumentals for the clubs and jukeboxes that they themselves enjoyed.

The best music comes out of a culture where people contribute for the love of it. People loved dancing and listening to soul and r&b music, are you saying that no musician enjoyed playing it?

Link to comment
Social source share
Pete Eccles Veteran

Pete Eccles

Posted
Posted (edited)

failed at what? So new orleans r&b wasn't folk music, made to sell to the culture it came from? It was actually failed attempts at elvis records? Remember, these cultures were making music and records before anyone had had a hit in these styles, why were they doing it?

Your scale of success and failure is strictly commercial, and while this is the common view of life these days, I assure you that not everyone thinks like that. Dont know why the thought of people making music cos they like it outrages you so much!

I made records in the 90s, I 100% had no desire to have a pop hit but was making music for underground scenes. I couldnt give a f*ck about fame and mainstream success, if I did I'd have tried starting a boy band.

even when I was making money, I wasnt doing anything in order to make money. I cant be the only one.

 

Edit - can't be bothered

Edited by Pete60
Link to comment
Social source share
Robbk Veteran

Robbk

Posted
Posted

Pop music can't be what's popular at the time, as that keeps changing.  Pop music is bland music from all eras, that is produced to try to reach the widest audience, so is "watered down" to be "palatable" to as many people from all walks of life, as possible.  Pat Boone singing "Tutti Frutti" is pop.  little Richard singing it is not, regardless of how many millions of sales it got.

  • Helpful 1
Link to comment
Social source share

Get involved with Soul Source

Add your comments now

Join Soul Source

A free & easy soul music affair!

Join Soul Source now!

Log in to Soul Source

Jump right back in!

Log in now!
 Share
Go to topic listing

Source Advert





×
×
  • Create New...