4 ms·

I think the term you're grasping for is "Lowest Common Denominator."

LukeShu 12y ago
I don't disagree that there is a lot of catering to the lowest common denominator in the music industry, both in pop music and the "best songs of all time" lists. However, I think the parent post has a point. (Now, I'm having a hard time figuring out how to effectively articulate it) The point of music isn't necessarily an insight. Listening to music is an experience, which is about how it makes you feel. Sometimes part of that is giving an insight, sometimes it isn't. Often, it is about combining an idea or concept with a performance or presentation; the idea/concept doesn't need to be insightful to be effective.
- catshirt 12y ago
  exactly. if you connect with art based on how "obvious" you find it, you are going to have a very shallow and boring art career. sometimes being obvious is what makes it art in the first place. hell, some art needs to be obvious.
  - qwerty_asdf 12y ago
    The inverse of broad appeal is the concept of The Long Tail, where there's a vast array of niche artists, that appeal to a small number of people. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_Tail https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_Tail There's a book by the same title, written by Chris Anderson: http://www.thelongtail.com http://www.thelongtail.com Prior to the internet, when advertising and media outlets were centralized, and retail businesses were distributed geographically, it was very difficult to gain a large following with niche appeal. But now that the internet has inverted the scenario, with decentralized, global exposure, and centralized market places like ebay and amazon, niche artists have a fighting chance at becoming famous within their genre. In other words, it used to be that the only way to catch some exposure was to appeal to centralized broadcasting networks, and they only took chances on performers who were low risk. Now, with the internet, risk doesn't really matter, and mass appeal is literally measured by the size of your following. The larger your following is, by default, the more compromises you'll have made to appeal to everyone following you. If you capture 1/2 the world as your audience, then you appeal to a broader, and more diverse audience, which has less in common with each other member of your audience, than if you managed to capture 1/4 the world. Getting half the world to agree on something, as opposed to creating something that three quarters of the world cannot relate to. So, Aesop Rock raps about hating your boss, and many people say: "Gee, yeah, I hate my boss too! This guy's awesome!", but Kool Keith raps about Kenworths with wings, and lots of people are like: "Is he weird?" because lowest common denominator.

I don't disagree that there is a lot of catering to the lowest common denominator in the music industry, both in pop music and the "best songs of all time" lists. However, I think the parent post has a point. (Now, I'm having a hard time figuring out how to effectively articulate it) The point of music isn't necessarily an insight. Listening to music is an experience, which is about how it makes you feel. Sometimes part of that is giving an insight, sometimes it isn't. Often, it is about combining an idea or concept with a performance or presentation; the idea/concept doesn't need to be insightful to be effective.

catshirt 12y ago
exactly. if you connect with art based on how "obvious" you find it, you are going to have a very shallow and boring art career. sometimes being obvious is what makes it art in the first place. hell, some art needs to be obvious.
- qwerty_asdf 12y ago
  The inverse of broad appeal is the concept of The Long Tail, where there's a vast array of niche artists, that appeal to a small number of people. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_Tail https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_Tail There's a book by the same title, written by Chris Anderson: http://www.thelongtail.com http://www.thelongtail.com Prior to the internet, when advertising and media outlets were centralized, and retail businesses were distributed geographically, it was very difficult to gain a large following with niche appeal. But now that the internet has inverted the scenario, with decentralized, global exposure, and centralized market places like ebay and amazon, niche artists have a fighting chance at becoming famous within their genre. In other words, it used to be that the only way to catch some exposure was to appeal to centralized broadcasting networks, and they only took chances on performers who were low risk. Now, with the internet, risk doesn't really matter, and mass appeal is literally measured by the size of your following. The larger your following is, by default, the more compromises you'll have made to appeal to everyone following you. If you capture 1/2 the world as your audience, then you appeal to a broader, and more diverse audience, which has less in common with each other member of your audience, than if you managed to capture 1/4 the world. Getting half the world to agree on something, as opposed to creating something that three quarters of the world cannot relate to. So, Aesop Rock raps about hating your boss, and many people say: "Gee, yeah, I hate my boss too! This guy's awesome!", but Kool Keith raps about Kenworths with wings, and lots of people are like: "Is he weird?" because lowest common denominator.