gunternezhoda said:

I don't like rap either but there is some good stuff out there...

No matter how hard I try for the sake of some of my friends, I cannot get into hip hop. I was concerned for awhile because I enjoy Rage Against the Machine, a little Limp Bizkit, and I've always been a fan of Mike Patton of Mr. Bungle and Faith No More who released their single Epic. All these acts have elements of rap, but I still enjoy them. One night when I was talking about this to a friend he started razzin' me calling me racist! I got a little concerned for a second until I said, that's not true because Eminem and Rittz suck worse than all of 'em!

Anyway, I would sometimes think about why it is that I just can't seem to appreciate the rap/hip hop style. The answer I came up with is 1; Pure rap is just to lightning fast on the words. It's frustrating to me when the artist is actually thoughtful because, by the time it registers in my mind when a rap expresses something worth pondering, the artist has already moved on to another thought. And 2; It's the inverse of traditional "music." in that it's the words themselves that carry us through the song. Traditional music and singing can both be what carries a song. Plus, a complete song can be written to include the use of one or the other, or both to create rhythm, melody, and harmony. Most importantly, none of it requires any words at all to convey a message and/or evoke an emotional response. Hip Hop on the other hand is very limited in it's musical capacity. First, it is the words themselves that carry the song, and without the beats it's just listening to a rhythmic talking. Can you imagine listening to someone machine gunning their opinions in your ear all day with out some fresh beats to keep it interesting? The same goes for the dj. Without the rapper, he might as well be spinnin' some trance or break beat, because you just can't have one without the other.

...if somebody sells millions of records the music must be pleasant to the fans...

This is true, but if anything has taught us anything it's the fact that popular music is created with the intent to attract as wide a range of an audience as possible. To this end it must be simple in form and base in message. Therefore, it could be said that popular music is objectively the worst kind of music! Nutshell, Pop is to music what fast food is to cuisine.

I would love to hear 'Brain Damage'in a completely dry mix.

I don't know. David Gilmore could probably pull it off. I don't know if "pink Floyd: Unplugged" would go over very well though. They were pioneers with experimenting with electronic sounds, so it just wouldn't sound right.

edit: I hit the post button accidentally before I was finished so, here's the rest:

It's all music, whether you like it or not. Musicians use the tools of their times. The art is to deliver a message in a song and entertain the listener...

Here, here! Classical snobs are the worst of the lot. The ones I've encountered have no use for any music that requires anything to be plugged in no matter how creative the arrangement or how difficult to perform. It's that pure sound that is all important. I respect this, but I find it strange how this utter devotion to sound blinds them to the fact that modern tech makes it possible to create music with any and all sounds that exist! If it can be recorded, it can be made into a song. I think that's amazing!

The first band ever (I think they where called 'Meet The Homo Sapiens') had only a couple of rocks >and some wood sticks.

LOL!