|
Post by Neo Angelo on May 11, 2010 12:57:28 GMT -5
idk about popular being mainstream. Black Metal in Norway is "popular" but is met with a lot of hostility from most people due to wat it stands for
|
|
RantzOn
über Farkan
Go home and be a family man...
Posts: 367
|
Post by RantzOn on May 11, 2010 19:31:09 GMT -5
... what the hell does black metal stand for anyhow? last video I saw involving a band was them screaming so loud into a mic that he looked like he was eating it
|
|
|
Post by Neo Angelo on May 12, 2010 9:19:31 GMT -5
Black Metal stands for anti-christianity,Satanism,anti-religion,Misanthropy, and Death hence why I don't listen to it
|
|
|
Post by Master Miek on May 12, 2010 12:24:19 GMT -5
Well that sounds like a wonderful and productive band, not. But anyways, I've never heard of them, but you guys have, so would it not be mainstream to me but mainstream to you? They seem like a band that not everyone exactly knows, especially if they are foreign, but then again foreign bands can be mainstream in their own country....the definition is more puzzling than it looks.
|
|
RantzOn
über Farkan
Go home and be a family man...
Posts: 367
|
Post by RantzOn on May 12, 2010 13:49:38 GMT -5
Heh, Well why not post what you guys think is mainstream and what isn't?
|
|
|
Post by Neo Angelo on May 12, 2010 14:30:06 GMT -5
sorry i should have specified. Black Metal isn't a band it's a subgenre of Heavy Metal popular in Norway and some of Denmark which stands for those things. As said it is popular in Norway but the majority of people do not like it and still try to put a stop to it.
|
|
RantzOn
über Farkan
Go home and be a family man...
Posts: 367
|
Post by RantzOn on May 12, 2010 15:00:24 GMT -5
Eh, anti-bands have been uncool since the 70's, Kinda died with the hippie revolution.
|
|
|
Post by Neo Angelo on May 12, 2010 19:57:44 GMT -5
personally i think the stuff sounds like crap
|
|
RantzOn
über Farkan
Go home and be a family man...
Posts: 367
|
Post by RantzOn on May 12, 2010 21:51:54 GMT -5
Like I said. It was like he was eating a mic
|
|
|
Post by Master Miek on May 13, 2010 0:28:21 GMT -5
That type of music is ironically known as Underground.
|
|
|
Post by Rumasai on May 13, 2010 5:57:03 GMT -5
I'd like to start this post by asking how this ended up in favorites? Another thing, I will defend myself here, Butch, but I actually do not mind Fall Out Boy. Honestly, I like some of their songs, and I don't think Alan ever liked them, and the same went for a LOT of people, so I don't really know what you're talking about there. Finally, mainstream has such an odd definition. There's "mainstream music," and then you hear people talk about bands with a "mainstream sound." I personally don't get it, and am too lazy to think about it right this second. People like throwing out examples, but its kind of hard to go by them if we Farkans cannot define the word through our own vocabulary, would you not agree? I mean, really, would would you do? Point to every underground band, and say if they aren't there, then they're mainstream? Jeremy, you brought up a few bands earlier who I do believe, even if not at this time, were once mainstream (not trying to call you out here, of course.) Everyone would walk around singing "The Beautiful People" by Manson, and most people know the name Metallica, not due to the Guitar Hero game, mind you. I find it completely unfair to say that all mainstream music is for fags, as the thread name implies, and until a good point is brought up to me on that note, my opinion will remain the same. As a final note, my favorite band as of now is a group who decides to stay underground, so I'm not giving you this in a biased manner. So, does anyone need to have an opinion with me?
|
|
wolfwoood9099
Normal Farkan
K
jack of all trades, master of none [on:PARTY TIME][of:hang over time]
Posts: 202
|
Post by wolfwoood9099 on May 13, 2010 7:40:40 GMT -5
to orville: oppion on penis??
OT: ok i think i got it, mainstream bands are bands/ solo artist who have very(emphasize very)close sound and type of musica style that is more "popular" with a majority of people, whuile maiunsgtream sound is slightly diffrent, if a band stars gettging a mianstream sound it taking a lot of parts from other know "MAINSTREAM BANDS" mkaing it sounding more appeling, while stil trying to be unique, this is possible with out bieng considered a mainstream band becuase its njot realy taking in all aspects of bieng mainstream. Now for mainstream in general what is and whats not goes by time, becuase at one point hair/glam metal was considered mainstream, now rap and certain rock songs are considered mainstream more. THe porbem wiht "mainstream " is the fact that it can consits of lots of thing and change almost sporadiclly, i meana at the time mettalic got big in the 90 guess what aws mainstream then...POP music. SO how the fuck does that happen, cause mainstream decided they wanted rock, and now everyone knows them. so mainstream bands are possible at anytime, would you consider three days grace mainstream for there sound or popularaty? obviously thier popularity but there sound is so fing uniique they arnt main stream, so now we live in a conundrum of mainstream and unmainstrea, and how also can a band make the self stay underground?? SIMPLE by not appeling to to many masses, and praying that MTYV or something doesnt find them lik them and just wana randomly put them on thier.
|
|
|
Post by Neo Angelo on May 13, 2010 8:52:49 GMT -5
Jared brings up a good point time does tell what is mainstream and what is not. when Metallica first started they were as underground as you can get but once the mid 90's and 2000's came they became exepcted on radio.
|
|
|
Post by Rumasai on May 13, 2010 13:45:09 GMT -5
Well, that was a point that I kind of tried implying in my post. Time itself does indeed change what we may believe is or is not mainstream music. However, one point that did stand out to me was how you said Three Days Grace is mainstream by popularity, and then went on to say they aren't because of their sound. Now, having a unique sound is certainly something, and I may be getting at what you meant here, but I think that the popularity of a band is actually more of what I look at when I consider calling things mainstream. I suppose their sound does factor in, but think about it. Suppose one million people like a band's (we'll use Three Days Grace as our example for the time being) sound, don't you think that they'd try going for things that would derive from the sound they have? If a select percentage is accepted into the more popular side of things, (its a very very tiny percentage) then these groups with the same sound that just hit it big have just made Three Days Grace's sound much less unique, and this is how the times change what we consider mainstream. Also, you brought up a good point, which I must bring up to use as a part of the base for my argument. Who the hell knows how everything happened as it did? We went through some weird eras in the past 30 years. From disco, to rock, metal, pop, and onto rap, who the hell knows what will be next? If something has ever been mainstream, I find it unfair to like them when they're less popular. With these changes as constant as they are, I cannot say that its fair to say that mainstream music is for fags. Butch, Queenston is foreign, are they not? What if a few Americans took on their sound, and brought it here, and it got popular? What would you say then?
|
|
|
Post by Neo Angelo on May 13, 2010 16:25:55 GMT -5
That's an intresting point Orville and Jared. I think we can all agree that time plays a big factor in what is considered mainstream. Many genres of music started out as underground rap and metal being the best examples. Things that were once considered mainstream like disco,blues, and jazz have since lost popularity are now underground music. Can we all agree on this one factor?
|
|