does anyone listen to Taylor Swift? tell me what the draw is

[rank]

I can't really analyze her* stuff but I'll be positive. I can listen to it while doing something else, it doesn't bother me, which seems to be the goal. I would make a lot of enemies by quoting recognized artists whose hearing bores me but in these festive times as much as Christmas and 1 happy new year, let's remain in peace, brothers of class D and amplified speakers.
* = Well again this is not a criticism but I have all the K. Bush but I only like Army Dreamers and only the music because the lyrics are ridiculous and sexist. I don't have all the Tori Amos but I only like her Stranglers cover although it is very inferior to the original because of her voice and the video like Alice in Wonderland or Little Red Riding Hood (kudos to the videographer for his incredibly original inspiration). Which she didn't even publish on the DVD of her clips (shame on you?).

 

[Sal1950]

I'd just so much rather listen to this years Rhino-Quadio release of Joni Mitchell's 4 landmark albums; For the Roses, Court and Spark, Miles of Aisles, and The Hissing of Summer Lawns. These 2024 Bluray's contain remasters in Atmos, Quad, and Stereo with the Court and Spark mix being a real stand-out for sound quality. Maybe one of the best transfers from a 1970s analog recording I've heard.
YMMV

 

[Peterinvan]

here is the business viewpoint…

https://hbr.org/2024/12/taylor-swift-and-the-strategic-genius-of-the-eras-tour

 

[rank]

It sounds way much better on colored vinyl with a strain gauge cartridge.

 

[Digital_Thor]

 

[Mort]

We did this already. It provoked more yelling at clouds.

 

[Galliardist]

Repeats.
What is this, we've hit out at enough commercial music, so now we're doing commercial TV?

 

[Digital_Thor]

We did this already. It provoked more yelling at clouds.

My bad.... feel free to delete

 

[Sal1950]

We did this already. It provoked more yelling at clouds.

So what's wrong with yelling at the clouds?
We got to get our lungs exercised in some manner, help to stave off COPD

I played the new BluRay of Carly Simon - No Secrets last night, what a brilliant sounding Atmos remix of that 1972 album.
It includes not only the Atmos mix but also the original stereo, quad, and 5.1s.
Taylor Who? LOL

 

[A Surfer]

It really isn't very different if you do a content analysis. I'm sure Carly Simon wrote primarily about people and their relationships to others correct me if I'm wrong.

Now the angles different artists may take can be quite different, but at the end of the day doesn't most music circle around the human condition?

 

[A Surfer]

And really, Carly Simon certainly used her looks as much as she could to keep the gaze upon her. Really don't see much difference.

 

[rank]

What she does doesn't bother me as long as I'm not forced to listen to her. I'm for the freedom to express any opinion.
I have no choice, mine are not shared very much.
But I have to admit that TS was a bit country at first (nice!), then it becomes pretty banal pop, making Mylene Farmer or Billy Idol (to cover it broadly) seem like Vivaldi orchestrated by John Coltrane.
And then the lyrics, uh, I...

 

[phoenixdogfan]

We did this already. It provoked more yelling at clouds.

Just so ageist. Seems to imply that because someone's birthday occurred earlier than yours, that person is not entitled to make an aesthetic judgement about a contemporary artist. So far in this thread I've seen people who didn't like Ms Swift's music who cited any number of REASONS (canned repetitive rhythm track, autotune, mediocre at best vocal ability, etc) and all any of the people defending her know how to respond with is she sells tons of records, and the critics are old men who yell at clouds, and, oh yeah, it's Rick Beato, so let's move on.

If you have a way of defending autotune, canned rhythm tracks and the like and believe they're best artistic practices. and especially if you believe it allows the artist employing them to live in the same pantheon with any number of former greats from earlier eras, please bring out that argument based on the performer's artistic merits. if you can. Otherwise, it seems ageist and condescending in the extreme to presume that people are not entitled to have their posts judged on the quality of their reasoning but rather should have them judged based on their birthdates--as if our thoughts are on the same plane as a gallon of milk.

That's a frame that should not be allowed to be placed around this discussion unchallenged.

 

[Robin L]

Just so ageist. Seems to imply that because someone's birthday occurred earlier than yours, that person is not entitled to make an aesthetic judgement about a contemporary artist. So far in this thread I've seen people who didn't like Ms Swift's music who cited any number of REASONS (canned repetitive rhythm track, autotune, mediocre at best vocal ability, etc) and all any of the people defending her know how to respond with is she sells tons of records, and the critics are old men who yell at clouds, and, oh yeah, it's Rick Beato, so let's move on.

If you have a way of defending autotune, canned rhythm tracks and the like and believe they're best artistic practices. and especially if you believe it allows the artist employing them to live in the same pantheon with any number of former greats from earlier eras, please bring out that argument based on the performer's artistic merits. if you can. Otherwise, it seems ageist and condescending in the extreme to presume that people are not entitled to have their posts judged on the quality of their reasoning but rather should have them judged based on their birthdates--as if our thoughts are on the same plane as a gallon of milk.

That's a frame that should not be allowed to be placed around this discussion unchallenged.

I'm old enough to know all about these reference points of popular music and have yet to be turned on by Ms. Swift's warbling. At the same time, my reference point has been the music of Beethoven since I was 15. The music that's regarded as so superior from 50 years ago? Canned repetitive rhythm track? Check - this is when the click track kicked in. Mediocre at best vocal ability? Check. None of the heroes of the rock and roll era are Lucia Popp or Hermann Prey. Ok, so they didn't have autotune back then, but that can be an aesthetic tool instead of a crutch. I've digitally pitch-shifted a "classical" acapella recording, no one is the wiser.

In any case, popular music is popular because it's popular. And, as the classical music critic William Mann pointed out (in reference to Sgt. Pepper), music is an encapsulation of time. Sgt Pepper represents 1967, Taylor Swift represents 2024, like it or not. She has a huge fan base. Doubtless some 50 years from now she will be remembered if for no other reason than for being so immensely popular in her time. The number of people still interested in Bing Crosby shrinks year by year, but he is still remembered for being immensely popular in his time. Us old folk will doubtless be playing our old recordings until we fade away. And the younger folk will be playing their Taylor Swift streams until they fade away, doubtless complaining about whatever comes next.

 

[Sal1950]

And the younger folk will be playing their Taylor Swift streams until they fade away, doubtless complaining about whatever comes next

Another completely ageist position Robin.
How many modern young female musicians would we have to list before it stops being said we're just geezers screamin at clouds?
There's a bunch of dedicated threads here on female vocals, just do a simple search.

Search results for query: female

www.audiosciencereview.com

I gave it a go on one of the first,

emotional female vocals

what are the most emotional female vocals and why?

www.audiosciencereview.com

Then a search in that thread for Taylor
Guess how many times her name was mentioned in the five pages ?
ZERO LOL

Amir just ran a thread on the female rock group The Warning.
Our members were mostly full of praise.

Yea she's mondo popular just like the Beatles.
I was never a big fan of them or her. LOL

 

[A Surfer]

I adore the simplification that seems to be hinted at here, but not openly stated which appears to be that if music is popular it is clearly less than.

And may I point out that artists who appropriately use technological aids such as auto tune are really pretty much doing the same thing as headphone designers who tune to evidence based curves to maximize appeal.

The technology wasn't there but I imagine that if there were other tools available for artists from the past that would have given them a cool new sound, or that enhanced their existing vibe, a large majority would have used them.

You don't like TS's music? No problem. Just stop being so derogatory and elitist. If people think what she does is so easy, no problem. Fill your boots, but it isn't. She actually does work her ass off and she is as valid as any other artist. Not sure why people like knocking her music down. Does the existence of her music somehow threaten the music that you like?

 

[antcollinet]

that person is not entitled to make an aesthetic judgement about a contemporary artist.

That's not what they are doing though. They are claiming their aesthetic judgement says something objective about the talent and value of a particular artist. It doesn't. They just don't like her/her music. Exactly like their parents didn't like the music they chose to listen to.... as has happened since forever - including the claims that it's not they don't like the muic, it's because the artist lacks talent. It wasn't true then - it's not now.

Oh - and I am from the same generation as the cloud shouters before you accuse me of ageism. My parents said exactly the same things about all the artists we all now hold as Gods of music.

Don't be your parents, people.

 

[Robin L]

That's not what they are doing though. They are claiming their aesthetic judgement says something objective about the talent and value of a particular artist. It doesn't. They just don't like her/her music. Exactly like their parents didn't like the music they chose to listen to.... as has happened since forever - including the claims that it's not they don't like the muic, it's because the artist lacks talent. It wasn't true then - it's not now.

Oh - and I am from the same generation as the cloud shouters before you accuse me of ageism. My parents said exactly the same things about all the artists we all now hold as Gods of music.

Don't be your parents, people.

" . . . every generation throws a hero up the pop charts . . . "

Paul Simon, "The Boy in the Bubble"

 

[Sal1950]

That's not what they are doing though. They are claiming their aesthetic judgement says something objective about the talent and value of a particular artist. It doesn't. They just don't like her/her music. Exactly like their parents didn't like the music they chose to listen to.... as has happened since forever - including the claims that it's not they don't like the muic, it's because the artist lacks talent. It wasn't true then - it's not now.

That's not fair, Did you read my last post?
It would be if all new music is criticized here but that's not the case.
Lot's of new music and artists get praised.
My over 4,000 album library is packed with music from artists of the 21st century.
I may not like what she does but it has nothing to do with any generation gap.

Going beyond that, we here are supposed to be music enthusiasts and have a least a little more knowledge of music/artists than the general public.
To damn everything negative thing that's said with cry's of generation prejudice is just as unfair.
And God forbid someone mention Beato who's spent his entire life creating, performing, recording and producing music.
He can't possibly know a damn thing either right? Mean ole Rick.
Just cause TS is the mega star of the decade she must be great and no one can criticize her?
I don't think so.

 

[antcollinet]

It would be if all new music is criticized here but that's not the case.

Just as my parents liked some of the music contemporaneous with the stuff they wrote off as talentless.

Here is the problem. There is no objective measure of talent that works. There is just opinion. You can't just point at musicianship alone (The Beatles were not that good if you were to do that) or lyrical genius (similar), or vocal quality (which is really subjective - Bob Dylan anyone), and so on. A good artist is usually very much greater than the sum of their parts. And how do you know your definition of what talent looks like has any bearing on talent as a general concept. How do you separate your personal preferences from an objective assessment of talent. You can't - any more than theatre critics can or movie critics - both classes of critics renowned for being massively out of touch with what people actually want or think is great. And even if you can - how do you convince anyone else that you are not just being your parents, or their peers - that your opinion on an artists talent has an objective validity?

I really don't get on with Jazz. Most jazz of the non "easy listening type" just sounds like a discordant mess to me. I could conclude that jazz musicians are talentless hacks incapable of playing something remotely tuneful or pleasing to the ear... but that'd be ludicrous, wouldn't it?

In the end - whatever my opinion of a musical genre or an artist - even if I cannot see any talent worth a damn - I'm rarely going to claim anything other than I just don't like their music - especially when my opinion is at odds with hundreds of millions. I'm going to be equally skeptical of anyone else's claims (even yours) about talent, or lack of, for any successful artist regardless of my personal opinion of them or their music.