What Makes Music Bad?

As a musician, I am very defensive and proud of my personal selection of what I deem to be good music.  I have certainly outgrown the time where I thought anyone who didn't agree with my musical opinion was a moron, and any music I hated was obviously bad music.  However, I still haven't worked my way up to being able to tolerate 99% of what is on the radio.  I still become very annoyed every time I see social networking statuses quoting the same line of the same song over, and over, and over as if the brilliance of prose in these lyrics made classic poetry look like crayon scribble.

Could we pretend that airplanes in the night sky are like shooting stars?

Though I no longer believe that just because I dislike something it sucks, there are artists I do believe to simply suck.  However, how does one decide who sucks and who doesn't?  There is no such thing as an unbiased opinion in the majority of cases, because if you don't like something you're more inclined to feel your need to explain why it sucks.  If you do like something, even if it did suck, you wouldn't recognize that aspect of it even if it were explained to you.

Meanwhile, someone gets away with sucking.

There are those who believe that the complexity of the composition is what designates its sucktitude.  Composers like Rachmaninoff and Mozart were recognized as great because they composed very complex pieces of music (which was also very pleasurable to listen to).  However, before symphonic music you'd get stuff like monks who sang very simple but very haunting polyphonic melodies.  What about the early blues songs with simple guitar?  What about some of the older rock and roll?  Just because something is simple does not automatically mean it is bad music.

Pictured Above: Musical Genius

So if we rule out complexity, what do we judge by now?  Number of records sold?  That would make Michael Jackson the unchallenged king since he's sold over 100 million records.  Though I'm not really into his music, I can admit the guy was talented.  I wouldn't say he's the best artist ever, though.  Judging by album sales would also make Backstreet Boys better than The Beatles.  I know, deep down in my soul, this is not so.  But why?  What makes The Beatles great and Backstreet Boys crap?

Well from my experience, a lot of people just want music they can dance and sing along to.  It is the easier, more simplified music that is more accessible because everyone likes to dance.  They don't want to have to worry about thinking about the music, they just want it to be fun.  Well, that's fine, but why aren't you listening to artists like Daft Punk, the Chemical Bros or The Crystal Method.  Those artists make music you can not only dance to, but are also more unique and complex than most of stuff you'll hear when you put on the radio.

What is a stanky leg, anyways?

It is my opinion that not enough people actually listen to music anymore.  Sure, people hear it coming out of their speakers and headphones, but they don't actually listen.  People will put some music on in the background and go wander off and do something else and dance to the beat and hum the melody and miss the real experience that the music is offering.  I'm also constantly shocked to hear how many people don't think lyrics are at all important.  But then again, these are the people who are listening to what I consider bad music most of the time.

To wrap up a rather long-winded and opinionated waste of blog-space, my definition of what is bad music is music that does not try to be anything more than something you can dance to.  The music that I refer to as bubblegum music.  It's nice for a little while but you'll always end up spitting it out.  Shallow, uninspired, uncreative, and unoriginal music which most of the time are merely marketing puppets.  Good music is music created by people who actually care.  I may not like your music, but if you create it with passion and honesty, I respect that.