I'm ϟƘƦƖןןΣ✘ and I Drop the Bass

You-


You've just jumped onto my side of the argument.


Me: Bands are better. Screw techno and the single guy mixing at a computer.

You: Skrillex/Dubstep are just as good.

So what does "pulling the plug" have to do with the quality of their music?

Seems like an awfully stupid thing to get worked up about.

You said, "Pull the plug on your guy. He can't do squat." I just proved you wrong.

Besides, I never said that all bands sucked. Just the ones you listed, they suck. You just assumed I meant that.

As far as I know, you just switched guys. We're at war here, don't abandon your own ship.


And, Cruz- the reason why I'm arguing over the plug is that most of the music I'm talking about can be played and performed without electricity.

His 'wubwubwub' that he opened this with cannot.


Why is this an important factor?

If his music was the good music- that means the world would have had no good music 'till the 1950's. Nevermind Jazz, Classical, Baroque, Folk, and the entire rest of civilisation's 6000 years existence.

I only displayed that to showcase my singing capabilities. That is me, Sonny Moore aka Skrillex, singing when I was 15. Get with the times. Besides, there are numerous ways to reproduce my style of music. It won't sound like it much, but that's what happens translating electronically produced music (which I might argue all music nowadays is) into more traditional instruments. Again, I am a musician who has performed rock and has also established himself as an EDM producer, much more than sticking to the same music for several years singing about the same themes and subjects, in my opinion.

But that(music made with assistance from computers) just derives from other music forms and genres.

He just said they're not good, he didn't imply that them not being made with computers makes them bad. I seriously hope you don't dislike some music because it was made on computers. The lack of needing to "plug" something in isn't a good argument as to why something is good or bad.

Also
>6000 years of existence

In my opinion, you're just one of those guys that think that music is all about guitar, drum, bass and vocal, and also dubstep is all about pressing the button PLAY. Hence, you calling dubstep shit.

I personally think no matter what kind of music there is, it should be appreciated. I try not to take this personally since I like dubstep, but I've seen a dubstep music in the making once (my friend is a dubstep artist back in Indonesia), and it's not just pressing the button PLAY.

I know you may or may not meant it literally, but the thought itself is irritating enough.

My point is, why not just appreciate its existence? They do put some effort too on making dubstep musics, even though their fanbase isn't really the best there is, my point is, appreciate the effort of bringing entertainment.

[EDIT]: Let's see here, after reading the 1950 or something part of your post, something came up on my mind. What makes you think that if this music was considered good, it automatically makes music that was made before the 50s was bad? It's just an advancement in technology, nobody has said that music before this era was shit.

but dubstep is shit...

Seriously, the real problem with dubstep isn't the music itself, but the fan-base who are confused by what dubstep and the people who think it's as simple as pressing buttons. The latter should also apply that to all forms of EDM in that case, which they don't more often than not therefore contradicting themselves. The former are just extremely ignorant about what type of music they're listening to.



That really boils down to personal opinions. It's like saying, "Eggo waffles are shit." Some people love them; some people don't.

Getting off track, I believe.

You posted the 'wubwubwub' track.

I posted groups in a slight against dubstep, which I believe I'm correct in saying that that was what that track is.

My stance has- and has always been throughout this discussion- that other forms of music are better than techno/dubstep because they do not rely on a computer.

Computers may be used in post-production for mixing and finalising yes, I'll grant you that- but they don't need it to play.

In which case you posted a new video of a band. Which doesn't rebuke my statements at all. And may- in fact- help my case.

As for themes and subjects- that is entirely independent of genre. Trends develop within genres- yes- but you're not locked into them.



I don't dislike all techno and dubstep, they're just not my style.

All I'm saying is that without computers, the genres wouldn't exist. And that they require less talent for the simple fact that- once you do it, once is all that you'll need to do it.

To play at a concert, you don't actually need to be there, because your song is entirely digital, and exists exclusively in the digital realm.

Techno/dubstep requires that you be good only once- and then you can ride that for the rest of your career.

Traditional artists need to be able to be good every, single time they play. You can't just make a CD and not do gigs.


And- yes- 6000 years of civilisation. Not mankind.

Sumeria, 4500/4000 B.C.

First recognised civilisation.

ohey, this thread is back

I don't care if its shit, Jazz is shit, RnB is shit, Rap is shit, Metal is the best.

My point is, whatever the music is, how shit or how good it is, appreciate the effort of the maker trying to entertain their audience. That alone is enough.

And your category of shit may be considered gold for someone, vice versa.




I gotta agree with you there, that is precisely why I mentioned that dubstep may not have the best fanbase there is. And yes, those people who thinks that Dubstep is just about pressing the play button irritates the hell out of me. Even typing on computers and chatting like this do need some skill you know.

[EDIT]Waiting on someone to post so I can reply PumpJack's latest post. CBF editing my post

Go ahead. It's good to have more voices in a discussion.

What's even being talked about? Too lazy to read.

Without other genres to be based off, it wouldn't exist either, but that's irrelevant to the actual "quality" of the music.

I guess you're arguing something different, although you're arguing because of that difference, it's magically superior.


Also you're still kidding right?

Also there were traces of older civilization in Iran, the Mediterranean, and South America. But I guess you're sorta right when you say "recognized"

Well, can't please everyone.



1. It's the instrument, of course it wouldn't exist without computers. Same with other type of instruments needed to play other genres of music.
2.No, what makes you believe it's like that? I don't think it's like that. Just like other musics, repetitive beats or melody will get you nowhere.



Then what's the point of a concert? Again, it's applicable to other genres of musics as well. It's the live shows of the person playing the music is what the audience is watching.



All artist, not just traditionals. I mostly agree with this part though.

A lot of musicians now rely on electronics not only for post-production and finalizing, like I assume you believe they do, but for replacing certain roles traditional people could have done but opted to replace them.

Fear Factory's The Industrialist was only Burton C. Bell and Dino Cazares, a singer and guitar player. They replaced the drummer with a drum machine during album production. Korn's Path to Totality also replaced the drummer with a drum machine. Those are the two I can think of at the top of my head.

As for themes and subjects, they are free to explore, but only a few band have the aptitude to actually do so. More often than not, artists restrict themselves based on profitability, culture, and the amount of time they have to make it. That happens with almost every single band/musician, if not all, out there.



Exactly what I mean. Certain genres appeal to certain people; common sense. However, people lose that idea when arguing over music genres in general, so it turns into one huge shitfest.

Well, can't please everyone.



1. It's the instrument, of course it wouldn't exist without computers. Same with other type of instruments needed to play other genres of music.
2.No, what makes you believe it's like that? I don't think it's like that. Just like other musics, repetitive beats or melody will get you nowhere.



Then what's the point of a concert? Again, it's applicable to other genres of musics as well. It's the live shows of the person playing the music is what the audience is watching.



All artist, not just traditionals. I mostly agree with this part though.

I like how this has turned into a more serious discussion that whatever is in Serious Discussion.

mu·sic
/ˈmyo͞ozik/
Noun

The art or science of combining vocal or instrumental sounds (or both) to produce beauty of form, harmony, and expression of emotion.

If you ask me, I don't hear anything instrumental, beautiful, harmonious or emotional about dubstep. Nothing about that definition says it has to be appreciated by anyone either, so it's probably why I just consider most dubstep to be plain noise. Anyone making a profit out of entertaining through that: good for them. But I just don't believe calling them "musicians" is right. It sits off with me, considering all the hard work my band and I had to go through, just to get two measly songs on the radio back home.