Rihanna Umbrellas - proof that music has nothing to do with music any more

Status
Not open for further replies.
morten

morten

Well-known member
As if it wasn't enough that we have to listen to the severely undertalented nasal "vocalist" Rihanna hiss out that uninspired drivel of a song on every single radio and TV station in the world (undoubtedly due to her poorly disguised sexual references like "Come into me" and her being pretty much nekkid in the video) we are now expected to all stand under her umbrellas - LITERALLY. In true hip-hop fashion Rihanna has now released her own line of umbrellas for all her sheep... ehm... I mean fans to stand under.

The umbrellas by the way look exactly like any other umbrellas - no hot nekkid chicks or anything to get into - just a big RIHANNA spelled out prominently on the side. Really worth shelling out $25 plus shipping for isn't it:

http://www.totes-isotoner.com/category/id/100371.do

mor10
*not interested in standing under anyone else's umbrella*
 
LOL. Your last line was funny.

But really? It's just how it goes, man.

Best thing is to realize that you too can capitalize on human nature and make moneez.
 
I just wish I could go to the store and buy some decent music again. This **** has nothing to do with music and everything to do with empire building. I blame the internet

mor10
* stay the f*&k away from my umbrella*
 
there's no need to hate on different genres of music just because you don't like them. considering how incredibly and stupidly popular it is on almost every continent of the planet, I'd say the song must be "good" to be so appealing.

I like how they discussed that on Children of Men. The old hippy guy picks up the main character and as they're driving to his house, he puts on the "current" music which is pretty much just noise, banging and screaming. But it was the music of the time.
 
mrWr0ng said:
there's no need to hate on different genres of music just because you don't like them. considering how incredibly and stupidly popular it is on almost every continent of the planet, I'd say the song must be "good" to be so appealing.

I like how they discussed that on Children of Men. The old hippy guy picks up the main character and as they're driving to his house, he puts on the "current" music which is pretty much just noise, banging and screaming. But it was the music of the time.
Click to expand...

This is an interesting discussion. What I can tell you is that Rihanna has just about zero respect in the real hip-hop and Rn'B community because she lacks talent. The people who listen to her are mostly white (thus the enormous success in Europe) people that want to be hard and cool. I have nothing against RnB or hip-hop but I hate untalented artists who are built up by greedy (and horny) record moguls blocking out the real talent and hogging the attention.

Rihanna would never have been signed let alone successful 10 years ago. she just doesn't have what it takes.

mor10
 
who exactly gets to decide what's "real" hip hop? What's "real" RnB?

I'll tell you this - "real" hiphop, jazz, RnB, rock and blues were all socially outcast for being black music, then accepted later when whites adopted the music and started playing it. What counts as "real" there?

Music is not a single, definable object, it's always nebulous, in a state of flux. Borders are always changing and growing. I mean, that's how anything creative is. Films do this as well - what once were screwball comedies and westerns and thrillers have all combined, shifted and grown in whole new directions. You can't claim that any one thing has to fit specific boundaries, or else music, art or film will never evolve.

I agree with you s he's not a particularly talented singer. She's good friends with Jay-Z which probably pretty much launched her career for her. But that's what is both good and bad about these industries - the people at the top prefer to give all the big breaks to their less-than-talented buddies, which gives people like us a chance to shine with our own talent.
 
Hello everyone,

I have to chime in here. Pop music is disposable, no shelf life whatsoever while there's an art to making "real" music. Real music is timeless and can be appreciated by artistic people like ourselves and regular folks.

Mr Wrong is definitely right *no pun intended* :) on his assessment of real music in America.

I'm just glad the internet is around so I don't have to listen to the same 10 songs on rotation on the radio in NYC. (TimurCivan can probably back me up on this) There's a lot of variety so I'm not forced to listen to too much garbage. You just have to look for what you like.

Happy listening
 
mrWr0ng said:
who exactly gets to decide what's "real" hip hop? What's "real" RnB?

I'll tell you this - "real" hiphop, jazz, RnB, rock and blues were all socially outcast for being black music, then accepted later when whites adopted the music and started playing it. What counts as "real" there?

Music is not a single, definable object, it's always nebulous, in a state of flux. Borders are always changing and growing. I mean, that's how anything creative is. Films do this as well - what once were screwball comedies and westerns and thrillers have all combined, shifted and grown in whole new directions. You can't claim that any one thing has to fit specific boundaries, or else music, art or film will never evolve.

I agree with you s he's not a particularly talented singer. She's good friends with Jay-Z which probably pretty much launched her career for her. But that's what is both good and bad about these industries - the people at the top prefer to give all the big breaks to their less-than-talented buddies, which gives people like us a chance to shine with our own talent.
Click to expand...

just to make sure this threead is killed by trigger happy mods:

Ah, you ignorant fool! the borders of music are not being expanded but contracted. popular music today is so narrow Paris Hilton has a hard time fitting through. the music industry has NOTHING to do with music and everything to do with money. as an example: Warner canned ALL bands that didn't sell more than.... what was it... 30,000 albums last year, even if they didn't actually produce an album that year. as a result they canned a huge pile of bands that in the 80s and 90s kept the label going. probably the most stupid decision ever made because cutting the roster resulted in massive decline in sales.

And just so you know, no major label will now sign you unless you can GUARANTEE at least 100,000 albums sold in the first year. they won't even listen to your demo!

trust me. I know what I'm talking about (though I can't cite my sources)

mor10
 
tommyinla said:
Hey Morten, you seem a bit jaded these days... :grin:
Click to expand...

these days? I was branded as a cynic in secondary school (about 15 years ago)

I'm not jaded - I just know way too much about how the world works. it's depressing.

that said, if you ask anyone who knows me they'll say that I'm always smiling, laughing and giggling. You just can't see it in text ;o)

mor10 -> :2vrolijk_08:
 
morten said:
just to make sure this threead is killed by trigger happy mods:

Ah, you ignorant fool! the borders of music are not being expanded but contracted. popular music today is so narrow Paris Hilton has a hard time fitting through. the music industry has NOTHING to do with music and everything to do with money. as an example: Warner canned ALL bands that didn't sell more than.... what was it... 30,000 albums last year, even if they didn't actually produce an album that year. as a result they canned a huge pile of bands that in the 80s and 90s kept the label going. probably the most stupid decision ever made because cutting the roster resulted in massive decline in sales.

And just so you know, no major label will now sign you unless you can GUARANTEE at least 100,000 albums sold in the first year. they won't even listen to your demo!

trust me. I know what I'm talking about (though I can't cite my sources)

mor10
Click to expand...

I agree w/ almost everything you said, it's just that it's still music. It's distinctly American, watered down formulaic tripe, but it's still music.

The RIAA companies these days are stupid as hell and continue to make stupid decisions and continue to have massive declines in sales. They've monopolized the market place so that if you don't sign, you don't get heard. But they've also screwed themselves, because controlling creativity is like having a hand full of sand - the tighter you squeeze, the more escape through your fingers.

With the internet, many MANY great bands are being discovered, and slowly but surely they're figuring out how to earn enough money to survive without signing onto a major label. People in Greenland can listen to a band that's still playing in a garage in San Diego, and if they're good enough, they'll catch on. Places like YouTube and Daily Motion and other video & music sharing websites can launch people's careers, if they've got the talent. It's no longer about who you know, it's about what you can do.

So the market is kind of dealing with it. The RIAA lives on their lawsuits and government handouts now, and it's only a matter of time before a big enough artist emerges and gets enough from the internet that he tells the labels to bugger off, and other bands start to follow suit. All that's really required now is someone with the brains to put it all together.
 
you forget that the major labels - especially Universal - is deliberately taking over distribution for smaller labels only to drown their artists so that the big label artists get preference. and without big label distribution you can't reach the masses.

sure, the net is great and all but it also provides an avenue for some seriously horrendous crap and the crap sadly blocks out the quality stuff you can find. just like it's easier to find a video of a dramatic chipmunk than a superbly produced short film on YouTube.

mor10
* going to sleep *
 
I'd never heard of this pop singer before. Good lord. Its true that most pop music is disposable. But there at least pop singers who can sing... Christina Aguilera for instance. Although I prefer Bjork.

This kind of crap angers me when my local musician friends are out there struggling and this Rhianna bullshit face has thousands of folks plastering her all over the free world.
 
Last edited:
morten said:
sure, the net is great and all but it also provides an avenue for some seriously horrendous crap and the crap sadly blocks out the quality stuff you can find. just like it's easier to find a video of a dramatic chipmunk than a superbly produced short film on YouTube.
Click to expand...

hey now, leave the chipmunk out of this! :angry:

there is a lot of crap out there, but there are also a lot more options for indie filmmakers. i truly believe that if you can produce something that's good and have an effective marketing strategy, you can make it happen.

of course, i'm all talk right now because i don't have anything on youtube, but one day i will.
 
theres musician's music and pop music. Pop is just that pop. It is whatever is the fad at the time and people tend to stick to whats current and what is the norm. It is made to sell and catch a current trend and not as a deep artistic statement. That is what The Rolling Stones put out Tattoo you a disco album. Thats why Sugar Ray started as a punk/rap band but had a goofy pop hit and made every song after it sound exactly like Fly. Jay-Z is all about building the largest catalog possible so he can retire on royalties. And he will recruit an army of short skirted steel-theighed booty shaking hoochies to do it.
 
morten said:
you forget that the major labels - especially Universal - is deliberately taking over distribution for smaller labels only to drown their artists so that the big label artists get preference. and without big label distribution you can't reach the masses.

sure, the net is great and all but it also provides an avenue for some seriously horrendous crap and the crap sadly blocks out the quality stuff you can find. just like it's easier to find a video of a dramatic chipmunk than a superbly produced short film on YouTube.

mor10
* going to sleep *
Click to expand...

The internet is young. I'm talking baby young. At this time a decade ago, you were laughed at if you were on the internet. Now everybody's on it.

There's a lot of crap out there, sure, but anytime you open the doors to more people, you get more crap. Look at the films out there now that cheap filmmaking has reached the masses - I would argue that it's probably gotten *harder* to get noticed as a filmmaker since the digital revolution simply BECAUSE the market is filled with so much crap.

The same with being a musician. I've been playing bass for over a decade, have my own little protools setup and have been recording my own albums for years now. It's VERY hard to get heard because people are usually so inundated with crap. But if I put on a CD for someone, they listen and their socks aren't knocked off, then that's my fault for making music that just isn't good enough. And internet or not, if your artistic product isn't making people gasp in disbelief because it's so good, it's not going anywhere, internet or old-media distribution.

But for the people that DO have the talent, it's here. For those w/ the imagination, the drive, the talent and the focus, they've already gotten notice from youtube and from tons of fans. like that Lars guy on youtube editing his own music videos.

Stuff like dramatic chipmunk are important clues to what's going on. There's a shifting market dynamic to get to viewers, now it's up to a smart person to get to them. But the record industry, the movie industry, noneo f them know how to get to that market just yet, so it's up to enterprising individuals to capitalise on that. I'm still working on that myself :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top