# 12 year old girls love, 20+ year old people hate



## Bullgrit (Jul 14, 2010)

People over 20 years old apparently all hate Justin Bieber, the Jonas Brothers, and Miley Cyrus. I don't understand why. I don't have feelings one way or another about them.

Who did 12 year old girls love, and 20+ year olds hate, back when we were young?

Bullgrit


----------



## Viking Bastard (Jul 14, 2010)

Hip hop. Spice Girls. Backstreet Boys.


----------



## crazy_monkey1956 (Jul 14, 2010)

N'sync, New Kids on the Block (recently saw they were trying to make a comeback...they should probably change their name to Old Men on the Block).

Seems to me that it is the pre-packaged kid pop, a genre that is currently monopolized by so-called by "Disney Pop."


----------



## Umbran (Jul 14, 2010)

Bullgrit said:


> People over 20 years old apparently all hate Justin Bieber, the Jonas Brothers, and Miley Cyrus. I don't understand why. I don't have feelings one way or another about them.




You're well above 20 years old, right Bullgrit?

Folks who are newly-adult will often reject things strongly associated with their prior adolescent status.  The things that say "childhood" are pushed away, as real, mature folks don't have anything to do with kidstuff.

Older folks may just find their music... insipid, lacking in nuance, depth, and emotional complexity.

There is also the simple matter of overexposure - the 'tween stars often take up a whole lot of screen and air time, sometimes seemingly forcing out other material.  Now, if you're a fan, that's a fine thing, but if you aren't a fan, that will add to your dislike.


----------



## coyote6 (Jul 14, 2010)

Bieber, Miley Cyrus, Jonas Bros., N'Sync, Britney, Backstreet Boys, Spice Girls, New Kids on the Block, Tiffany, Debbie whatshername, Menudo, Madonna . . . you can probably run the line all the way back to the Monkees, if not the Beatles and Elvis, I imagine. Who knows, maybe Sinatra and Crosby -- I'm not that up on '40s singer fan demographics. 

Some of the artists evolve and expand out of that demographic (i.e., Beatles, Madonna, even Britney Spears and Justin Timberlake; Miley Cyrus seems to be trying that now, judging by her latest video), and some go away when their particular generation of tweens & teens grows up (like, say, most of the rest of the boy bands).

I think genres other than pop go through the same thing, more-or-less. Avenged Sevenfold was really popular with the kids I knew that "hated" pop, but not hearing much about them now. Or look at hip-hop -- how many artists manage to maintain popularity & sell records over multiple decades? Not many that I can think of. I'm curious to see if Jay-Z, Eminem, Lil Wayne, & so forth can pull it off. Jay-Z's been around 14 years or so, which is a long time, but still seems as popular as ever. 

Others were around earlier, and haven't had flops per se -- but they haven't put out albums recently (I'm thinking about Will Smith & LL Cool J, for example). If LL had a massive hit album tomorrow, I think they'd probably call it a comeback.


----------



## Crothian (Jul 14, 2010)

Bullgrit said:


> Who did 12 year old girls love, and 20+ year olds hate, back when we were young?




The Brat Pack, Bubblegum pop music


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jul 14, 2010)

Bullgrit said:


> Who did 12 year old girls love, and 20+ year olds hate, back when we were young?
> 
> Bullgrit




Shaun & David Cassidy and Leif Garrett were the teen idols when I was a kid.

As I got older, there came the rise of the Boy Bands, which gave me the first inklings of the purchasing power of Generation Y.

I was on vacation from law school, visiting some people in Michigan and their daughters were all into NKOTB  (New Kids on the Block, for those not in the know).  Each girl in the little pack had bought the band's latest CD...and most of them had bought one _for each member of the band_.

I just about wore out my portable CD player spinning Soundgarden's_ Screaming Life/Fopp_ to stay sane.


----------



## El Mahdi (Jul 14, 2010)

Yeah, I was going to say Sean Cassidy also.  For the guys, I remember one was Kristy McNichol (and of course Farrah - but 20+ guys liked her too, it was just the 20+ women that hated her).


----------



## Ed_Laprade (Jul 14, 2010)

coyote6 said:


> Bieber, Miley Cyrus, Jonas Bros., N'Sync, Britney, Backstreet Boys, Spice Girls, New Kids on the Block, Tiffany, Debbie whatshername, Menudo, Madonna . . . you can probably run the line all the way back to the Monkees, if not the Beatles and Elvis, I imagine. Who knows, maybe Sinatra and Crosby -- I'm not that up on '40s singer fan demographics.
> 
> Some of the artists evolve and expand out of that demographic (i.e., Beatles, Madonna, even Britney Spears and Justin Timberlake; Miley Cyrus seems to be trying that now, judging by her latest video), and some go away when their particular generation of tweens & teens grows up (like, say, most of the rest of the boy bands).



This. When I was a kid it was Elvis, then the Beatles. And from what I've heard, Sinatra and Crosby started that way. But they were older and got into movies, which probably is what kept them current as their fans got older. Just like Elvis and the Beatles. And, of course, their music was good, just like Elvis and the Beatles.

I'd say that the Monkees are a prime example of a band who's audience outgrew them, but they were an artifically created band to begin with, so their staying power was questionable from the beginning.


----------



## Thornir Alekeg (Jul 15, 2010)

Rick Springfield and Duran Duran


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jul 15, 2010)

I...

I must confess that I _love_ Duran Duran.  Always did, always will.


----------



## LightPhoenix (Jul 15, 2010)

coyote6 said:


> I think genres other than pop go through the same thing, more-or-less. Avenged Sevenfold was really popular with the kids I knew that "hated" pop, but not hearing much about them now.




I still hear Avenged Sevenfold on the radio.  It doesn't help that their drummer died.  I'm sure that's a big reason their name has been out of the scene lately.

I've noticed a similar growing trend specifically in rock towards what I would call "pop-rock."  There seems to be a homogenization of rock, punk, pop, and even hip-hop influences to create songs (and bands) specifically for radio play on "rock" stations.  I wouldn't be surprised to discover that there are similar trends in country and rap as well, but I don't listen to those genres enough to be able to say as much.

As a classical music fan, I always elicit a shocked response from people when I say I don't like Mozart.  Mozart basically was the pop music of his time, and to this day remains what I would consider classical pop music.  While Mozart does have some excellent pieces, I find most of his work to be relatively homogeneous in the same way I find pop homogenized today.


----------



## Wycen (Jul 15, 2010)

Dannyalcatraz said:


> I...
> 
> I must confess that I _love_ Duran Duran.  Always did, always will.




There there now, it'll be ok.


----------



## Fast Learner (Jul 15, 2010)

I think it has absolutely nothing to do with the quality of the music or anything like that. I submit that it has to do with the new usurping the old, with the old being whatever music you first fell in love with and the new being anything loved by tweens and teens. 

The quality of the music is something mostly established by what was popular when you fell in love with the power of music (and its ties to that thumping in your loins that was just beginning to develop).

"Kids these days" disapproval is more than 2000 years old, with some Greek philosopher or another (don't remember who now) claiming that the youth of his day were spoiled rotten. Musical taste is just where "kids these days" strikes first.


----------



## nerfherder (Jul 15, 2010)

Dannyalcatraz said:


> I...
> 
> I must confess that I _love_ Duran Duran.  Always did, always will.




There's no shame in that 

I saw them at Wembly Arena.


----------



## Doug McCrae (Jul 15, 2010)

The Bay City Rollers. The Osmonds seem a particularly good comparison to the Jonas brothers.


----------



## Thornir Alekeg (Jul 15, 2010)

Dannyalcatraz said:


> I...
> 
> I must confess that I _love_ Duran Duran.  Always did, always will.



 Well, I loved them as a kid and still like them today, although I thought they lost something when Andy Taylor left the band.  

As for Rick Springfield; that was the first concert I ever went to.  Not because I really liked Rick Springfield, but because it was the first concert in the town in which I grew up, after they built a pavilion at a park for them.  It was a fun concert and hearing Rick Springfield songs on Back to the Eighties night brings back some good memories.


----------



## Bullgrit (Jul 15, 2010)

> Rick Springfield and Duran Duran



The Greatest Hits CDs for both of these are literally in my truck CD player at this moment.

A lot of names have been thrown out in this thread, but really, were those artists reviled then as much as Bieber, Jonas, Cyrus are today? Every single time I've seen these kids mentioned, the reference is disparaging.

Granted, I don't see the same references that 12 year old girls see, and I've never specifically looked any of them up anywhere. What I've seen is just random mentions in random places. But for people to go to the extent to constantly make insulting comments about these kids -- to the extent that I, as a random non-12-year-old-girl, have never seen a single positive note -- strikes me as obsessive.

I don't remember hearing/seeing constant insults directed at the old tween idols. But then, maybe the current 12 year olds don't hear/see the constant insults directed at their tween idols.

Bullgrit


----------



## Thornir Alekeg (Jul 15, 2010)

Bullgrit said:


> The Greatest Hits CDs for both of these are literally in my truck CD player at this moment.
> 
> A lot of names have been thrown out in this thread, but really, were those artists reviled then as much as Bieber, Jonas, Cyrus are today? Every single time I've seen these kids mentioned, the reference is disparaging.
> 
> ...



 Part of this is also the fact that we didn't have the internet and multiple channels of 24 hour news and entertainment, so we were not as innundated with both the overexposure of these performers, or the resulting backlash.


----------



## ggroy (Jul 15, 2010)

Bullgrit said:


> Who did 12 year old girls love, and 20+ year olds hate, back when we were young?




Some 12 year old girls "graduated" to "hairspray metal" a few years later in the latter 1980's.  Stuff like Poison, Warrant, later Motley Crue, Skid Row, Whitesnake, Bon Jovi, Cinderella, Europe, Winger, etc ... 

Some younger relatives a number of years younger than me, were really into that stuff back in the late 1980's.


----------



## coyote6 (Jul 15, 2010)

I remember plenty of boy band (NSync, Backstreet Boys, etc.) bashing. I probably contributed some. 

The hot teen idol-ish pop stars have always been bashed, as far back as I remember. Disco got steamrollered. Miley Cyrus's dad was ridiculed. 

I don't recall having seen anything particularly egregious about Cyrus, Bieber, or the Jonas Bros; but I might just have ignored whatever I've seen.

Hit Perez Hilton's website sometime, and see the bile that gets laid on all sorts of people. People seem to hate celebrities, yet spend plenty of time, energy, and money on 'em, and on trying to become one.


----------



## ggroy (Jul 15, 2010)

Bullgrit said:


> A lot of names have been thrown out in this thread, but really, were those artists reviled then as much as Bieber, Jonas, Cyrus are today? Every single time I've seen these kids mentioned, the reference is disparaging.




The headbanger metal crowds I was aware of back then, really hated bands like Duran Duran.  Some weirdo metal types I knew of back then, would do stuff like beat up on preppy types and rip into shreds the preppies' expensive clothes in the process, for the "offense" of listening to Duran Duran and other "crappy" bands.


----------



## ggroy (Jul 15, 2010)

coyote6 said:


> I remember plenty of boy band (NSync, Backstreet Boys, etc.) bashing. I probably contributed some.




I know the feeling.  Back in the day, my friends and I use to bash really "wimpy" stuff like Leif Garrett.  I remember at the time, other people were also starting to even bash heavier bands like KISS when they were producing really crappy sounding records like Unmasked and Music From The Elder.


----------



## the Jester (Jul 15, 2010)

New Kids on the Block. Backdoor Boys. Marky Mark. Menudo. New Edition. N Synch. Milli Vanilli.


----------



## Viking Bastard (Jul 15, 2010)

Dannyalcatraz said:


> I...
> 
> I must confess that I _love_ Duran Duran.  Always did, always will.




I was in diapers when Duran Duran were at their peak and while I wouldn't say that I _love_ them, they have a solid place in my playlists.


----------



## Thanee (Jul 15, 2010)

Bullgrit said:


> ...all hate Justin Bieber...




I wouldn't call it hate, but... pity maybe?







Bye
Thanee


----------



## Viking Bastard (Jul 15, 2010)

I don't get the hate against Bieber. Like or dislike his music (I haven't heard much of it), but he seems like a smart kid, that doesn't take his fame too seriously.


----------



## Tonguez (Jul 15, 2010)

LightPhoenix said:


> As a classical music fan, I always elicit a shocked response from people when I say I don't like Mozart.  Mozart basically was the pop music of his time, and to this day remains what I would consider classical pop music.  While Mozart does have some excellent pieces, I find most of his work to be relatively homogeneous in the same way I find pop homogenized today.




I was watching 'Rock me Amadeus" by Falco last night - that brought back memories

now when I was 12 (but not afaik a girl) I was listening to an eclectic mess of Prince, New Edition, Boney-M, Culture Club, ABBA, Cyndi Lauper, Madonna, Meatloaf, Ice-T, Lionel Ritchie - so  I'm not sure what old people didn't like

and now as a 30+ man I will happily admit to liking Mileys country pop!


----------



## ssampier (Jul 15, 2010)

Meh - Miley Cyrus I can understand because she is quite annoying. My favorite was a brief interview where she said, "Wha you say?" I barely know who Justin Bieber is (if it wasn't for Twitter I wouldn't know at all).

In my day (which isn't that far away considering I'm < 30) there was New Kids on the Block. I never liked them much. New Kids were followed closely by Kris Kross. Kris Kross made kids at my elementary school wear their pants backwards. I can still remember Kris Kross's, "Made you wanna JUMP, JUMP."

Kris Kross was followed closely by MC Hammer and parachute pants. I can still hum (most of the words) "Can't Touch This."

Vanilla Ice was popular about the same time. I remember thinking it was so _cool_ that Vanilla Ice was in Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles II movie. I never owned a single album of his, however. Even today when I hear the rift in "Under Pressure" by Queen, I still think of Vanilla Ice first.

Much later there was Backstreet Boys and NSync. I never got into those, but I did own a Christina Aguilera cd or 2. 

As you can see, I was a weird kid.

Miley Cyrus and Justin Bieber are probably just another set of manufactured idols. In time they will be replaced by someone else.

The popularity that I never got was High School Musical. Why were those shows popular?


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jul 16, 2010)

Bullgrit said:


> The Greatest Hits CDs for both of these are literally in my truck CD player at this moment.
> 
> A lot of names have been thrown out in this thread, but really, were those artists reviled then as much as Bieber, Jonas, Cyrus are today? Every single time I've seen these kids mentioned, the reference is disparaging.




I'll step up and say that Rick Springfield and Duran Duran were definitely better than Biberjonescyrus.

Rick was a solid if uninspired adult rocker singing his songs at the ladies, just like Huey Lewis, Eddie Money, Loverboy and so forth.

Duran Duran made slick Europop with some fairly mature themes (look for the unedited version of the "Girls on Film" video...and they didn't edit out much) while simultaneously affecting clothing styles around the world.  Even if they didn't _create_ the style of the 80s, they certainly were at the vanguard.

Both artists appealed to young ladies, its true, but their target audience was much broader.

In contrast, Bieberjonescyrus, the various Boy Bands and so forth are solidly _aimed _at the teen market, and their music lacks a certain...depth of maturity.

Besides that, check out their sheet music.  The teen idols from the 1970s on have MUCH simpler music- lyrics, arrangements, instrumentation, time signatures & tempo- all aimed at less sophisticated ears.


----------



## Diamond Cross (Jul 16, 2010)

80s popular is nothing like today's popular music. A lot of it was actually ground breaking music that had never been heard before. A lot of it was written by the actual bands themselves.

Today's popular music is watered down compared to that. A lot of it is actually written for the singers. 

That's the problem. It's comparing grapefruits to lemons.


----------



## Fast Learner (Jul 16, 2010)

You kids get offa my lawn!

Seriously, early rock was way simpler than the big band music that came before it. Did that make it less good? The bulk of grunge music was much simpler than the heavy metal it followed. Simpler sheet music has nothing to do with the quality. 

And popular music written by the musicians who sing it is "actually written for the singers," so what? Does that mean that The Beatles, Led Zeppelin, and hundreds of other bands were bad?

Really, I'm surprised that you guys can't see this for what (I think) it is: the tastes of today's youth seem horrible simply because they're not your tastes, nor that of your peers or parents. Thousands of years of complaints by elders haven't changed this cycle one bit.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jul 16, 2010)

Fast Learner said:


> Seriously, early rock was way simpler than the big band music that came before it. Did that make it less good?




No, because it was a new music form.



> The bulk of grunge music was much simpler than the heavy metal it followed.




Again, its a different music form, and needs to be judged on its own merits.

Comparing classical European symphonic music to jazz swing to metal to prog rock to skiffle to ska on the basis of complexity is just going to give you headaches.



> Simpler sheet music has nothing to do with the quality.




Its not a 1-for-1 comparison, but there is a relationship.  Something can be quite simple and of high quality.

However, that's not what is going on in Teen Idol music.  (See below.)



> And popular music written by the musicians who sing it is "actually written for the singers," so what? Does that mean that The Beatles, Led Zeppelin, and hundreds of other bands were bad?




While both the Beatles and Led Zeppelin did do some cover tunes, there is almost nothing in their catalogs that was written for their singers by other writers.  Lennon/McCartney and Page/Plant are 2 of the more successful writing duos out there, rivaled only by partnerships like Tyler/Perry, Taupin/John and Gibb/Gibb.

However, I don't count that as being a proper distinction.  If you look at both Motown and Nashville, you'll find a LOT of hit songs (of various quality) written by professional songwriters, and bands that compose little if any of their own material.

And then there are iconic songwriter/performers like Bob Dylan, Carole King and Prince: all great performers, all also renown for the music they've written for others.



> Really, I'm surprised that you guys can't see this for what (I think) it is: the tastes of today's youth seem horrible simply because they're not your tastes, nor that of your peers or parents.




Not it at all.

"Teen Idol" music- regardless of genre- is typically watered-down versions of what is popular among adults.  Debbie Gibson and Tiffany's music was simply highly diluted versions of what artists like Madonna and Cyndi Lauper were doing.  Where Madonna was singing about someone who was in a new relationship that made her feel "like a virgin" (which she clearly wasn't anymore, according to the lyrics) and Cyndi sang about masturbation, Tiff was singing a (cover) song about new intimacy and _possibly_ going all the way.  Gibson's work is similarly "cleanly racy."

Leif Garett has admitted he was trying to emulate Robert Plant- visually, if not musically. The Cassidy brothers music has elements cribbed from rock and psychidelia, but neither of those genres' edge.

Silverchair compared to the grunge rock of the day seemed...light.

Old Skull compared to their elders in punk bands came across as...cute.

Black Tide, skilled at playing thrash metal though they are, still sound a bit youngish compared to even _early_ Metallica, Megadeth, Anthrax, Testament and Metal Church...but they show lots of promise.
_
Oh yeah...and those high-pitched squeaky voices bug the hell out of me.
_
Don't get me wrong, there is nothing wrong with high notes in and of themselves- I love Ian Gillen's howl on "Child In Time" or Chris Isaak's sweet wail in "Wicked Game"- its that in the voices in the teen's music has no relief...no contrast.  Their voices- and the music written to support them- is usually heavily shifted to the trebel end of things, except for the rhythm section.

Gillen and Isaac typically cover a few octaves when they sing.  Even the great Michael Jackson couldn't do that until his vocal chords matured.


----------



## Kaodi (Jul 16, 2010)

I do not dislike Justin Bieber. I dislike Bierbermania. In fact, I admire Bieber for having had the initiate and werewithal to promote himself via YouTube.

The Jonas Brothers? I know virtually nothing about them, other than the vague irrational feeling that I should dislike them.

Miley Cyrus... Ugh... I do not dislike her music or anything, but from the first day I have always disliked her because it felt like her road to stardom was just a rehash of Hilary Duff w/ Lizzie McGuire. That and her Dad is who he is (though I did not have as solid an opinion on that until I saw him in the Spy Next Door... double ugh...). I just have the feeling we will soon be sticking her in the same bin we file away Lindsay Lohan in our minds.


----------



## Fast Learner (Jul 16, 2010)

It seems that we must agree to disagree then. I don't think any of those arguments hold water, they're all arbitrary measures of why what you like is better than what they like. In my opinion, obviously.


----------



## TheAuldGrump (Jul 16, 2010)

Hmm, I don't _hate_ Miley Cyrus, I just think that her voice has to mature a bit.

She can sustain, and has some, but not enough, bottom. Her breath needs work, but she can hit a note consistently through most of her range, faltering a trifle on the lower and upper registers.

The Auld Grump, now Queen Latifah... I hate most of her music, but the girl has _bottom!_ I love the Dana Owens album.

*EDIT* I never heard of most of the bands in the original post, and wouldn't know the Jonas Brothers if I saw them on the street.


----------



## Thornir Alekeg (Jul 17, 2010)

As the father of a 10 year old girl, I am happy that my daughter can't stand Justin Beiber.  "It sounds like a girl singer, and not a very good one," is what she told me.  She's OK about the Jonas Brothers, but has not spent any of her allowance on iTunes buying their music.  She's still a bit young for the crazy teen girl stage, but I am encouraged so far that she might avoid it.

Her tastes have so far run towards Taylor Swift, Lady GaGa and David Archuleta; music that does not make me want to poke out my eardrums (most of it is on my iPod as well).


----------



## El Mahdi (Jul 17, 2010)

I think there are two very different things being discussed here, tween music and teen music, and they are usually very different things. Tweens (*aprox. 12 and under) usually like the simpler, cleaner, watered down, poppy, happy, kid-stuff music. However, 13 and up (*aprox.) is where kids really start exploring who they are. Where they start developing and molding their own identity. A big part of that for many kids is music. At this point, kids aren't necessarily looking for something specifically simpler or watered down, their usually just looking for music that _lyrically_ speaks about what they are going through, and _musically_ just sounds _different_. That may take the form of a structurally "simpler" music, but can just as likely be the opposite. From generation to generation though, simpler has not been a constant. Hell, when I hit that stage, my music of choice was prog rock (Asia, Yes, old and new Genesis, Pink Floyd, etc., and Christian Rock like Petra), as compared to my parents 50's and 60's pop (their high school music) and Disco (their young adult music). I definitely would not call my choice of music to be "simpler" compared to my parents.

Even though there is, to a certain extent, a commonality of artists and styles for a generation, every kid is different. Also, the artists talked about in the OP (Justin Bieber, the Jonas Brothers, and Miley Cyrus) are much more _Tween_ music than _Teen_ music. However, Miley Cyrus's current music is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. She has definitely reached a stage where she is attempting to forge her own identity. Whether you like her new music or not, listen to the lyrics and you'll understand exactly what I'm trying to say. She's definitely trying to break out of her _"Tween"_ mold and explore the person and artist _She_ wants to be.

Teens want to differentiate themselves from other generations. They want to seperate themselves from younger "kids" music and show to the world and themselves they are "growing up". And they want to seperate themselves from older or "adult" music and show the world they are individuals with their own unique identities.

I believe it's why the music "the kids are listening to" will always be different from and ridiculed/criticized by (some) older people. That is unless we understand and simply accept the differences and the reasons for them.

Style and level of complexity is most definitely variable from generation to generation. Finding new things to do with music though, is becoming harder and harder. It seems like it's all been done before. I think this is one reason why the "recycled" criticism seems so prevalent also. I however think that music continues to evolve and change. When we are 80 years old, the "current" music of the time may likely seem very alien to us. Question is though, will we be as vehement and non-understanding as previous generations have?



(*What age this happens at, and to what extent, can be very different for each kid and has as much of a societal/cultural factor as it does a biological age factor.)


----------



## ggroy (Jul 17, 2010)

Thornir Alekeg said:


> As the father of a 10 year old girl, I am  happy that my daughter can't stand Justin Beiber.  "It sounds like a  girl singer, and not a very good one," is what she told me.  She's OK  about the Jonas Brothers, but has not spent any of her allowance on  iTunes buying their music.  She's still a bit young for the crazy teen  girl stage, but I am encouraged so far that she might avoid it.
> 
> Her tastes have so far run towards Taylor Swift, Lady GaGa and David  Archuleta; music that does not make me want to poke out my eardrums  (most of it is on my iPod as well).





One of my 11 year old nieces listens to Lady Gaga, Shania Twain, and Blondie oddly enough.  Her mother (a cousin) listens to stuff like Blondie, Madonna, INXS, Soundgarden, etc ... kinda obsessively.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jul 18, 2010)

Fast Learner said:


> It seems that we must agree to disagree then. I don't think any of those arguments hold water, they're all arbitrary measures of why what you like is better than what they like. In my opinion, obviously.




Let me put it to you this way...

Teen Idol music is actually a construct of the labels.  Those who are chosen are picked precisely to be marketed as cleaned up versions of popular music.  This isn't an opinion- this is what the labels actually do.  The labels choose what will be sung, they choose the venues, they choose clothing and other image decisions.  Venture outside of those boundaries, and you're dropped.

And the thing is, I'm absolutely NOT saying teens can't make good music.  If you look at the history of rock, many legendary performers (especially guitarists) started off when they were no older than- or even years younger than- their fanbase.

When Metallica started off, they weren't old enough to drink in the bars they were playing in.  James Hetfield didn't hit 21 until after the band's first album had been in stores for a while.  And some of their earliest work is still on their set lists.

Point at any Teen Idol who successfully made the transition to adult musical performer, and you won't see the same kind of demand for their early work.  (AFAIK, the only pre-solo era song Michael Jackson kept in his set for any length of time was "Ben".)


----------



## Banshee16 (Jul 18, 2010)

The New Kids on the Block.  Rick Astley.

Banshee


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jul 18, 2010)

NKOTB haven't released a hit album in years- their most recent album (2008, as I recall) was a modest success at best.  Their fans are not interested in new, all they want is the old stuff.

IOW, they have not successfully transitioned into an adult act.

Ricky Martin, Mark Wahlburg, Bobby Brown, Robbie Williams, Justin Timberlake and others HAVE done so...but again, they don't routinely include more than 1 or 2 of their Boy Band hits in their sets.

Unless they're on a retrospective tour with the Boy Band, of course.  Then its all about the old stuff, and very little of their_ new_ stuff gets played.  Its almost as if there is a Great Wall of China between their early careers as teen idols and their careers as adults.

Rick Astley, OTOH, hardly qualifies as a Teen Idol.  He's more of a One Hit Wonder.


----------



## Fast Learner (Jul 18, 2010)

Dannyalcatraz said:


> Let me put it to you this way...
> 
> Teen Idol music is actually a construct of the labels.  Those who are chosen are picked precisely to be marketed as cleaned up versions of popular music.  This isn't an opinion- this is what the labels actually do.  The labels choose what will be sung, they choose the venues, they choose clothing and other image decisions.  Venture outside of those boundaries, and you're dropped.




I don't disagree with any of that. Still doesn't make the music inferior to the music you like.


----------



## BrokeAndDrive (Jul 18, 2010)

Everyone say this out loud: "All music that I do not like, is inferior to music that I do like."

To all who says that: you're right.



P.S. Bathory and Limbonic Art murder you and has your mom make another one of you _just so they can kill you twice!_


----------



## Wombat (Jul 18, 2010)

Partridge Family


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jul 18, 2010)

Fast Learner said:


> I don't disagree with any of that. Still doesn't make the music inferior to the music you like.




I'm not talking about whether I like or dislike the music in question.  Some of it I do, some of it I don't (I could probably sing David Cassidy's "I think I love you" even today, but couldn't even ID a song by Bieber or a Jonas Brothers piece).  That doesn't prevent me from recognizing its quality or lack thereof.

By its very nature, Teen Idol music of each genre is _designed_ to appeal to fans of particular musical styles.  As such, it may seem virtually indistinguishable from the works of other performers within that genre...with a casual listen.  But the more you analyze it, the more it suffers in comparison.

The fact is, when discussing the quality of art of any kind, its difficult to use generalities, objective standards are hard to find.

But I think all of us would agree that while a paint-by-numbers piece may be quite attractive, it will still lack a certain essence as compared to an original piece of art.

And that's the problem with the music of Teen Idols.  Its not meant to last.  Its throwaway music.  It is so ephemeral that it often doesn't appeal to its own biggest fans after just a few years.  It is to serious music as Cracker Jacks are to a balanced meal- it may seem tasty right now, but eventually, you're going to need something better.


----------



## Tonguez (Jul 19, 2010)

Dannyalcatraz said:


> Point at any Teen Idol who successfully made the transition to adult musical performer, and you won't see the same kind of demand for their early work.  (AFAIK, the only pre-solo era song Michael Jackson kept in his set for any length of time was "Ben".)




Paul McCartney - his Beatles work still outranks anything that followed (seriously, name two Wings songs)


----------



## coyote6 (Jul 19, 2010)

Tonguez said:


> Paul McCartney - his Beatles work still outranks anything that followed (seriously, name two Wings songs)




"Live and Let Die" and "Band on the Run". 

Note that I am not a big Wings fan -- I have never owned an album, though I'm sure someone in my family did when I was a kid. If you had asked me to name three songs, I'd have to go to Google.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jul 20, 2010)

Tonguez said:


> Paul McCartney - his Beatles work still outranks anything that followed (seriously, name two Wings songs)




Paul McCartney was, even as a young musician with The Beatles, a serious rock musician.  Yes, he was the idol of many teens, but he wasn't a Teen Idol in the sense that I'm talking about: a solo performer or member of a band basically created by the record company (or more rarely, broadcasting company) to be target marketed at teens (or younger).

IOW, not Sir Paul, but The Monkees.

As for Paul post Beatles?

Lets not forget songs like "Ebony & Ivory", "Listen to What the Man Said", "Uncle Albert/Admiral Halsey", "Magneto & Titanium Man", "Jet", "Maybe I'm Amazed" and "With A Little Luck"- and no, like coyote6, I don't own any of his post-Beatles stuff.

He may have peaked with The Beatles, but he's no slouch on his own.

(Though looking at what I just wrote, perhaps I should track down a "Best of" album...)


----------



## Pig Champion (Jul 20, 2010)

Diamond Cross said:


> 80s popular is nothing like today's popular music. A lot of it was actually ground breaking music that had never been heard before. A lot of it was written by the actual bands themselves.
> 
> Today's popular music is watered down compared to that. A lot of it is actually written for the singers.
> 
> That's the problem. It's comparing grapefruits to lemons.




Careful, your age is showing.

Gorillaz are one of my generation's pop-bands and they are very ground breaking and original.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jul 20, 2010)

Gorillaz has a couple of songs I really like with some interesting arrangements...but by & large, I can't credit them with being terribly original.  _Distinctive_, yes, but not original. 

Not that that is an indictment of their intrinsic value.  AC/DC hasn't really stretched their artistic boundaries much since 1981's _For Those About To Rock._


----------



## Pig Champion (Jul 20, 2010)

We'll agree to disagree then.


----------

