Album Rating: 2.0

Is "world music" really any different than "contemporary western" as a catch-all? I feel like there's a trend lately with people having adverse reactions to generalising terms precisely because they're unspecific, but that's the whole point of these concepts. There is actually some pretty simple music theory behind this particular distinction btw, some of you guys might be interested in that, it's not so deep. Anyway, these words simply serve a different function than the more specific genres, and you can still be just as nuanced as you want while they exist, no need to choose which set we keep.



I also think there's far too much reverence for music styles and culture in general. I'm yet to enounter a compelling argument for why people should be limited in what they experiment with artistically, what influences they take, where they get them, how they use them etc. It seems that when it comes to anything tied with culture, everyone walks on eggshells as though something sacred is being poked and prodded. I don't think ideas of any kind deserve such mystical treatment. Time passed and geography kept pockets of people isolated. I say mix that dead dude's ideas with this dead dude's ideas and see what happens. That said, there's nothing wrong with critiquing and comparing the product to the source. Like this EP sucks balls and they do a poor job of implementing the styles they're drawing from, so I guess it's not a great example of successful melding haha, but hopefully the sentiment is understood.

All y'all are racist.

""For a start, it implies cultural superiority. Artists from America and Europe tend not to get stuck in the world section, just those that don't speak English or come from "exotic" parts of the world. They can be consigned safely to the world music ghetto, ignored by the mainstream and drooled over by those who approach music as an offshoot of anthropology."

this is kinda where im coming from, not that ppl who use it are racist but rather how it's employed within the music industry...
"

lmao

i liked when you not ironically used the guardian for the source of your fucking nonsense

this thread epitomizes what sputnik has devolved into

Who wrote that? Is that real?

Album Rating: 3.0

Scuro I don't think anyone is saying that they should be taking... foreign influences, rather the term "world" music is vague and doesn't properly credit the genres and cultures they're borrowing from, kinda like referring to Africa as if it were one giant country

I think taking influences from all over the world should be encouraged, the only reason why I'd tongue-in-cheekily call this "gentro-pop" is because their intentions seem super strange

Album Rating: 1.0

Not a fan of the argument made in the Guardian article -- and I lean more towards Scuro's reasoning -- but I think I understand where people are coming from. Good discussion here. I think, certainly, there's a laziness to the term that's a tad offensive, though perhaps not in a racial sense. With this project in particular, there does seem to be an odd air of condescension stemming from the mix of international stylings -- one that I find off-putting, purely because the music is bad -- but I think that's something that arises moreso from how Martin's carried himself as of late (his last album was no different), as opposed to a feeling of racial or cultural superiority. Entertainingly, then, I think what I get from (albums like) this is that: merely borrowing sounds associated with other cultures doesn't constitute good music, especially when it's pulled off as thoughtlessly and carelessly as this. I don't know, though, something just stinks.

"this thread epitomizes what sputnik has devolved into"

still better than most news threads on here

Album Rating: 1.5

Interested to see the music theory behind that scuro

Not 100% convinced saying it's a generalization excuses the term from having some clear implicit connotations within today's music realm but I conceed that it may not be as racist as I originally thought. Also not exactly calling this release racist, just that as Blush said...something seems off here with how they incorporate different styles.

its not fucking racist you mongoloid

no arrangement of letters is ever inherently bigoted, bigotry = intent

again: grow up

Album Rating: 1.0

"world music" is a term that only exists when done by/for white people. literally no american jams local music from angola and is like "wooo world music!!!" it only applies to despacito or coldplay

Album Rating: 1.0

plus do you know how fucking big africa is for example. no one hears "galway girl" by ed sheeran and thinks "ohhhh this is typical EUROPEAN music". to put any "tribal" sound in an "african music" box ignoring how many different types of african music there are is soooooo rude and is heavy stereotyping. disservice

Album Rating: 1.5

"this thread epitomizes what sputnik has devolved into"



it was a pretty friendly debate with arguments and respect on both sides. I really wish Sputnik "devolved" more into this but yeah, that'll never happen



@alamo, my comments on the last page refer to what you said

Album Rating: 1.5

Chuck I wasn't talking to you thanks

Album Rating: 1.5

"Is "world music" really any different than "contemporary western" as a catch-all?"



There is a reason I put it in quotes. How often do we refer to the music we like as "western"?



And I don't anyone is arguing against your second point Scuro. Artists (or anyone really) should be encouraged to learn about about different cultures and be willing to share and exchange ideas. But there is a way to do that respectfully and I don't believe Coldplay are doing that. Even with their best intentions it just seems really half assed.

or maybe generalizations are sometimes useful to group some things together that you arent privy to understanding the breadth for which you would be able to then divide up into more specific labels and said generalizations are completely fucking harmless because no arrangement of letters is ever inherently bigoted, bigotry = intent

im sorry your education failed you guys

Album Rating: 2.0

@neeka and @dfevil yeah I realise my second point was kind of a seperate thing, just wanted to voice it.



"There is a reason I put it in quotes. How often do we refer to the music we like as "western"?"



You wouldn't, out of context (unless you're into country and western, but who is?). However, I have a big book titled "A History of Western Music" sitting to my left, which was required reading for a university course on western music theory and history. As general as the term is, it's actually useful, and there are plenty of broad departures in the music theory of Western Europe + the usual suspects (U.S., white Straya) compared to places like Eastern Europe, Asia, Russia (wherever they fit), India, South America, Indonesia, Cuba, the Middle East, Africa etc.



"Interested to see the music theory behind that scuro"



Okay, now keep in mind this is super general and reality is more messy than this, but...



West prefers - straight playing, simple rhythms and more complex harmonisation/melodies, 4/4, 2/4, 3/4 and compound time signatures derived from these, accents on "strong beats" (generally 1 and 3), church modes, strong key centres and tonality, avoidance of the tritone (thanks Satan), consonance, intervals based on mathematical divisions (thanks Greece), perfect 4ths and 5ths, division of range, uses vocals a lot and in accordance with melodic and harmonic conventions.



"East" prefers - swung playing/more groove oriented (shuffle), complex rhythms, divisions and groupings, but simpler melodies and harmonies (often purely percussive). Lots of 5/8, 7/8, 7/4, 6/8, 5/4 etc (some of it gets really interesting, lots of Indian music is accompanied with hand patterns which help count the rhythm, Afro-Cuban bembe uses complex accenting to create an unusual feel over more simple 6/8 patterns, Bulgarians like to use 7/4 but break it up into smaller units that stretch across different "bars"), strong syncopation, ambiguous or shifting key centers, microtones, natural dissonance, non-retrogradable rhythms (popular in India, the rhythm is the same forwards and backwards), displacement, polyrhythms, cross rhythms, uses vocals less often, generally to provide a drone and to follow the rhythm.



Anyway, that's just some of the broad differences I can think of atm, also check out this dude play the ceramic jug: https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=pabZ9ExVsZ8

That's only tangentially related, but it's awesome.

Album Rating: 1.5

how is south america eastern though? That's like literally impossible by definition

Album Rating: 2.0

It isn't, I'm just trying to avoid saying "Eastern countries and also these countries that aren't Eastern but have similar music conventions, but Eastern and western are really vague terms and what do they even refer to because Australia isn't really West either and plenty of people debate the use of these terms".



Also these are very general and obviously it misses out on the abundance of cross-over and styles that don't line up, but (mostly thanks to Greece), "Western" musicians discovered a lot of information about melody and harmony, and then (mostly because of the Church), certain keys, modes, and intervals became stock standard and tied to religious activities, while others were neglected or outright banned because God likes consonant music lol, so the West kind of devloped this more rigid, melody-centred set of conventions, while the rest of the world was experimenting a lot, but was much more focused on percussion rather than notes.

Album Rating: 1.0

Woke centrist take: I'm just glad people from all sides of the political spectrum can come together and find reasons to hate this album.