Is the audience for popular music created by the music industry?

I think that it would be fair to argue that the fan base for popular music is more dominantly created by the music industry. The music industry is a rapidly growing, producing song after song, new artist after new artist based on what audiences will buy in to. The creativity of music is being hindered with record labels wanting to produce music that is safe, music that they know will sell, and consequently songs now seem to sound the same, with a slight change to enable it to be classed as a 'new' single or album. Money is now the object, not talent or innovation. The industry, other than music itself, involves massive marketing campaigns, music videos and even products all to make sure artists albums will be succesful. Media hype around an artist will create their success, whether it be from positive of negative reviews. Popularity of people, whether or not they have any music talent at all, is also being created by the media/music industry. Actors seem to be able to easily mould themselves into pop/rock stars, from their already established fan base, such as Paris Hilton, or Lindsay Lohan. Their audience is already created which makes their records sell, so in many ways i do agree that the audience for popular music is created by the industry, although obviously it is not always the case.

Hip-Hop Magazine Review

Big Up! Hip Hop magazine is what peeps are calling the UK's most raw, edgey and unique peice of entertainment since Dizee. It's about real life, real music, real heads and it KEEPS it real without a doubt. Its a sick mix off educatin' and entertainin'. Educatin' our youth; our brovas about new, upcoming artists, and legends such a Jigga man himself and Snoop, is whats keepin Hip Hop alive, and this magazine keeps us in the mix. Not only does it educate, it also keeps a brova happy with things such as Hip Hop Honeys, sexy ladies rippin' it up with a story to tell, and in this weeks issue we got ultimate BEEF stories in Hip Hop. There nothin keeping you away from this magazine, along with what already sounds like a bangin magazine, its also includes articles on cultured hobbies like Graf from all over the UK, and talks about the art behind the wall sprays. Hip Hop magazine is off the heezy, can't get no better, its the ultimate music mag, the shiz,wicked tunes, insane content, what more could a boi want? keep it real readers...

Are blackness and whiteness useful concepts in the study of popular music?

I feel it is important to recognaise and understand the history of music, and a significant part of its history is based on race. Many black artists are said to be the idea makers behind certain genres, as we discussed in lecture the 'white fascination with black music' is the reason for rock'n'roll, which shows the link between race and music. Although race should not be of importance, the truth is, that music has been shaped by it, and certain genres are associated with races, such as Latino music, Bhangra, Hip Hop and Pop. Although during the history of music "whiteness" and "blackness" did dominate audiences due to the culture of that time, i feel in this day and age it is less useful in the study of current popular music. People of all different ethnicities and backgrounds nowadays listen to an array of cultured music. White people listen to rap, black people listen to rock and artists are multi-racial across the wide spectrum of music genres. Music is now multi-racial, with cultures actually coming together and creating fusions of their sounds to produce new sub-genres.

Words: 186

It’s hard to mention political change within the music industry without mentioning the Band Aid and Live 8 concerts. Perhaps the most popular and successful concerts in history are clearly the most well known. But one has to argue whether or not this was actually down to the music itself or just that the whole event had such a passionate creator. There is no doubt that the concerts and music artists helped, and gave huge awareness to the cause, reaching audiences in the billions, but whether or not the concerts themselves would have actually created the change is questionable. I believe that It was mainly down to Bob Geldof putting such pressure on the government and demanding changes be made.

Although many have tried, including modern artist like Eminem with his 'Mosh' single in which he calls for everyone to vote, I don’t really feel as though great political change is often made. Something on the scale of Band Aid and Live 8 will have the back bone to bring around change, but I don’t think a lonesome artist can have the scope to bring genuine change, and it’s merely a using the idea of poltical undertones as a gimmick

Are youth subcultures genuine signs of revolt or simply the manifestation of style?

I don't believe that in all cases a youth culture is a group of people revolting against society, youth sub-cultures are more like a trend, within the youths, and most of the time are people just trying to fit in with a crowd or style. A sub-culture can sometimes be a revolt, for example against your parents, but it is based on how you are brought up and your relationship with your parents that effects a reaction, like Cohen said, that youth sub-cultures are 'the need to create and express autonomy and difference from parents and need to maintain parental identifications.' This is true to some cases, as an extreme style could shock parents and bring them to the realisation that their child is outrageous, a rebellion. This is something i believe comes with teenage years, as most people do grow out of these sub-cultures, like 'Emo' or 'Grunge',people of my age now look back and laugh at the styles they used to follow. Fashion and music also affect the sub-cultures, many styles stem from idolisation of artists, such as the Emo look and 'My Chemical Romance' and the grunge look years ago from bands such as 'Linkin Park' and 'Lost Prophets'. Wearing a certain outfit and having a certain look i do not believe completely is a revolt, more of manifestation of style brought on by the industries that surround us.

Does the emergence of the digital download signal the end of the music industry?

I do not think the digital download is bringing the music industry to an end. Being able to download music online is only making the industry more accesible, and is giving listeners a chance to be more creative and open minded about what they listen to. In the past you would have to go into a record shop and try and persuade your record to be sold, or send demos to music companies only to sit on a pile and never get listened to (in many cases) whereas now you can be alot more proactive in getting your music heard as there are so many more avenues. Although there are websites where you can download music for free, many people still use legal sites lke itunes as a result of viruses and to ensure good quality. The charts are now also based on downloads, which means no one is losing out on the top spot due to online music purchases and is also being bought more often and in larger quantities because of the convinience of buying it in your own home. Not only are artists selling their current music online, but their backlogs of songs are also being sold with it as going online can open our eyes to more music we wouldnt think of buying in stores.

Can popular music ever really be unplugged?

If you are defining unplugged as music being played purely acousticly, then i don't think popular music can ever really be unplugged. Popular music relies purely on technology to be enhanced,polished, and most importantly recorded. Not only would no use of technology affect the sound, it would also affect the distribution of the music. Having no recording equipment would prohibit the music from being pre-recorded, and would have to always be played live. The problem with playing music live and acousticly, is the fact that the sound wouldn't be very audible, and without speakers and amps would prohibit live concerts with large audiences like we have in this day and age from ever happening, as only the people in the front row would hear it! Popular music is 'popular' purely because it is easily accesible and we hear it on the radio, on TV and can find out about new artists and songs/albums through marketing and technology. Although there are some artists who have recorded acousticly, the fact that it is recorded just proves everything needs to be plugged!

Words: 180

What is world music?

World music, when looking in high street stores such as HMV mainly consists of music from other countries, performed in the language and relevant to the culture or place itself. I think world music can be described differently to music that is just in another language other than english, it holds traditional values that global music doesn't hold. Popular music is reguarly sung in different languages, such as Shakira who sings in spanish and english. Her music is not world music as its a multinational product.World music can teach you about a countries culture, from its language to its social references. From listening to brazillian music such as 'Choro', a popular genre with a specific dance style attached to it, you can see how this kind of music can only be appreciated if you understand where it comes from and its meaning. This is not the case for popular music in westernised countries, as alot of the musics elements are borrowed from world instruments and styles, as we learnt in lecture. Overall i think world music is the same as 'local' music, in that its relevant and colloquial to a certain culture/society and indigenous in its production.

Is popular music a mass produced commodity or a genuine art form?

It is hard to define what is 'art' or 'popular music' but i feel that music has become a mass produced commodity, holding little credibility. Reading Adornos theory i agree with his interchangeability and pseudo individualisation theories that portray the sense of repetitiveness and copying in this day and age of music. I think for something to be an art form is to be unique and created by ones own knowledge and talent; a lot of popular music of today just follows the same formats and themes. It does accentuate similarity, and does churn out songs in order to gain money and not credibility for musical creativeness. I think that this is more related to the last 10-15 years of music, which could be due to the fact that everything has been done already, and there's nothing new to think of,forcing us to maybe unconsciously mimic music we already know. I think that money has tarnished the music industry of today as it is no longer about musical talent but more about image and selling.

Words: 175

How useful is Richard.A Petersons production culture perspective of Rock'nRoll?

Reading Petersons thoughts on Rock'n'Roll music in 1955, I disagree with some theories. His report doesn't discuss the musical creativity and how the technology of music was evolving rapidly, i.e the guitar, making music sound different, exciting and shocking audiences as it was something they had never heard before. Not only was music evolving,so was fashion and culture, people were becoming open to new ideas. This was mostly to do with the War, people trying to forget bad memories and becoming more liberated. I feel that Rock'n'Roll was a catalyst towards the dramatic social changes.I disagree that artists like Elvis and Berry were not responsible for the birth of the genre. Of course the artists took advantage of the circumstances, but they should take credit for what they did for the history of music. Although Peterson is correct that a baby boom wouldn't have produced a teenage audience in 1955, children born during the war would have been teenagers by this time, and this created the big audience, and popularity because they would have also had bad memories of the war, many with lost family members. I believe it became a sort of escapism, the change in society was reflected in music.

Word Count: 202

What is Popular Music?

Popular music could be described as music that appeals to a wide audience. There are diverse genres that can all be named popular, from classical music to indie rock. For something to be popular it must be recognisable by many, and successful. Popular music can be influenced by current affairs, urban culture and many other factors such as television programmes and sport. In the music charts at present there are a diverse range of music genres all in the same top 40, from 'The killers', to 'Take That' and 'MGMT'. All very different in their style but similar in their popularity. They are all seen as popular due to their high record sales and fan bases. Popular music can be related to by the public easily as it is usually given television, radio and magazine marketing regularly so that the public are aware of the artists. Popular music is enjoyed collectively by large groups of people no matter what its style or purpose.

Word Count: 162