5 ms·

Well, the top 100 is the literal lowest common denominator. It's music for people who don't like music, who make up the majority of the population. It's expecte

by vdaea 3y ago

Well, the top 100 is the literal lowest common denominator. It's music for people who don't like music, who make up the majority of the population. It's expected that it's shit.

diggan 3y ago
Yeah, like the top 10 programming languages are the lowest common denominator. It's basically programming for the people who don't like programming. The rest of us use lisps like a real programmer.
- sph 3y ago
  Programming languages are not commissioned and designed by mega conglomerates for maximum likeability and to sell conference tickets, tshirts and merchandise. At least not yet.
  - couchand 3y ago
    You've precisely described Java! And Go!
  - diggan 3y ago
    We're getting there, some of the languages that at least been commissioned and designed by mega corporations, albeit for fuzzy reasons: Go (Google), Swift (Apple), Kotlin (JetBrains), TypeScript (Microsoft) and Dart (Google) One could of course argue that these were created to solve problem X or for reason Y instead of just raising the profile of the company who created it.
coldtea 3y ago
>Well, the top 100 is the literal lowest common denominator. It's also the widest and more representative index of the tastes of each era/generation. That's despite whether there are "true Scotsman/real music lover" listening to 15th century lute music or modern free jazz albums (or the "really good obscure EDM few listen to"). Of course there are those too. That's beside the point. >It's music for people who don't like music, who make up the majority of the population. It's expected that it's shit. And yet it was excellent in the past, like the 60s and 70s, and far more complex lyrically and musicallly (outliers aside).
- mewpmewp2 3y ago
  But it's also the reasons why you are listening to the music. E.g. if I'm working I don't want to focus on the lyrics. And e.g. if I go for a run, I also want to dive deep into my own thoughts instead of thinking or interpreting the song. I think there's just maybe more activities now where you listen music as an addition rather than the main thing to do, so you want it to be a pleasant and stimulating background vibe of the sort. In the past, you didn't heave easy to carry on ear or headphones, but now it's so much easier to just listen to everything while doing other activities.

by vdaea 3y ago

Well, the top 100 is the literal lowest common denominator. It's music for people who don't like music, who make up the majority of the population. It's expected that it's shit.

diggan 3y ago

Yeah, like the top 10 programming languages are the lowest common denominator. It's basically programming for the people who don't like programming. The rest of us use lisps like a real programmer.

sph 3y ago
Programming languages are not commissioned and designed by mega conglomerates for maximum likeability and to sell conference tickets, tshirts and merchandise. At least not yet.
- couchand 3y ago
  You've precisely described Java! And Go!
- diggan 3y ago
  We're getting there, some of the languages that at least been commissioned and designed by mega corporations, albeit for fuzzy reasons: Go (Google), Swift (Apple), Kotlin (JetBrains), TypeScript (Microsoft) and Dart (Google) One could of course argue that these were created to solve problem X or for reason Y instead of just raising the profile of the company who created it.

coldtea 3y ago

>Well, the top 100 is the literal lowest common denominator. It's also the widest and more representative index of the tastes of each era/generation. That's despite whether there are "true Scotsman/real music lover" listening to 15th century lute music or modern free jazz albums (or the "really good obscure EDM few listen to"). Of course there are those too. That's beside the point. >It's music for people who don't like music, who make up the majority of the population. It's expected that it's shit. And yet it was excellent in the past, like the 60s and 70s, and far more complex lyrically and musicallly (outliers aside).

mewpmewp2 3y ago
But it's also the reasons why you are listening to the music. E.g. if I'm working I don't want to focus on the lyrics. And e.g. if I go for a run, I also want to dive deep into my own thoughts instead of thinking or interpreting the song. I think there's just maybe more activities now where you listen music as an addition rather than the main thing to do, so you want it to be a pleasant and stimulating background vibe of the sort. In the past, you didn't heave easy to carry on ear or headphones, but now it's so much easier to just listen to everything while doing other activities.