Inspired by this tweet. 

No, of course not, and you already know that. But you also already know that music that a lot of people think is good does have a better chance at success, and success is a good indicator of just how many people think it’s good. It follows that looking to popular material is a pretty good way to find good material; it’s not like pop radio or streaming companies’ playlists, for instance, have a vested interest in promoting material that’s unpalatable, and it’s not like most people pay for things they don’t like.

no its subjective

 

not like video games

Isn’t Dance Monkey the biggest female streaming song?

I thought this was a clear answer, no.

not at all, do you think the most streamed female song on spotify Dance Monkey is good?

Just now, Tylerbv said:

Isn’t Dance Monkey the biggest female streaming song?

That song is exceedingly annoying but not unacceptable like that my name is chicky song.

Only for Taylor. Taylor is global. 

I would make the argument that ticket sales are the only measure of success that does-to some degree-indicate quality.
 

All other numbers can be faked or manipulated. Radio deals, streaming payola, playlisting, and stans buying multiple variants are just a few of the reasons why airplay, streaming stats, and even pure sales can be misleading. Not everyone with 5+ pop radio #1 hits can sell out stadiums. Not everyone with multiple 1B+ streamed songs can sell out stadiums. Not everyone who nabs a multi-platinum album can sell out stadiums. An artist may be “good enough” to buy a CD or to not change the station / skip the song when it comes on, but that doesn’t mean audiences think you’re good enough to see live. 
 

Ticket sales can’t really be faked. 70,000 butts in chairs don’t lie. A small percentage may be stans attending multiple shows or tickets bought by businesses for their employees or else gifted to charities, but the overwhelming majority of those people are there because they think the artist has quality music and puts on a quality show. And most people would not spend hundreds of dollars to attend the concert of an artist they think is “just okay.”

No.

nostalgia + fomo is the current formula for success.

Most people don’t have the attention span to even listen to the music they play in 2023. We are suffering a plague of popular vibes. A veneer of 20th century aesthetics. A purgatory of elevator music that bafflingly moves the unwashed masses to tears.

The public’s taste in music is becoming socially conservative. Artists who are inoffensive, apolitical, straight, and increasingly white are thriving this year. 
Successful people can sometimes make quality art, but success has nothing to do with quality. Especially today.

No, time will be the truth teller.

Lol, no. I agree with the original tweet, and that's coming from someone who prefers Taylor overall.

9 minutes ago, lostcause said:

No.

nostalgia + fomo is the current formula for success.

Most people don’t have the attention span to even listen to the music they play in 2023. We are suffering a plague of popular vibes. A veneer of 20th century aesthetics. A purgatory of elevator music that bafflingly moves the unwashed masses to tears.

The public’s taste in music is becoming socially conservative. Artists who are inoffensive, apolitical, straight, and increasingly white are thriving this year. 
Successful people can sometimes make quality art, but success has nothing to do with quality. Especially today.

How do we stop this?

Well, like most answers in life, the answer is it depends.  
 

Being big does not mean it is per se good. However it does often signify that a lot of people think it is good.  And then for an artist to release a big album or a big single many times throughout their career or for a single/album to have a lot of longevity in the public zeitgeist generally means it is good.  
 

I don’t think any of the major MPGs ATRL talks about could have gotten to where they did without being good.  Saying otherwise just kind of expresses your own inability to appreciate music beyond your personal subjectivity.  Madonna, Celine, Whitney, Beyoncé, Taylor, Rihanna, Janet, Gaga, Shakira, and Adele have all released and made excellent music.

It's literally on that tweet you quote. Nobody is water tortuing you to listen to something you don't like.

In fact, it's the other way around. You constantly seek out music you made it very clear that you don't like, just to constantly complain abour it, OP.

 

19 minutes ago, lostcause said:

nostalgia + fomo is the current formula for success.

The public’s taste in music is becoming socially conservative. Artists who are inoffensive, apolitical, straight, and increasingly white are thriving this year. 
Successful people can sometimes make quality art, but success has nothing to do with quality. Especially today.

EXACTLY!

Every time I see benitosversion anywhere it’s them talking about Beyoncé  her GRIP

 

Anyways the answer is no popularity =/= quality. But most things that are popular are at least good. The most popular thing is not usually the best though

Edited July 20, 20233 yr by bijonse

When a song is successful you hear it more and more, from people’s cars, to parties, to IG reels and TikTok’s. Eventually you start knowing all the words and if the song is catchy enough, you’ll sing along when it comes on. This is why I say that some people (be ATRL is evident of that) needs to be told what songs are good and by this I mean, the quality of a song is highly effected by how successful it is. It creates almost like FOMO where everyone loves the same song and knows all the words but you don’t want to be left out of the crowd by not liking the song or knowing all the words.

It's partly true. If no one is there to hear it or sing its praises, does it matter if it's good? Success validates your visibility and in turn, your influence. People site the Beetles as being the most influential act of all time but why were they influential? Massive success. 

 

It's the nature of things. Popularity alone isn't gonna make something good, per se. But it certainly can elevate something already good to greatness, or even something great into something timeless. 

Edited July 20, 20233 yr by Ibrahim

No

obviously not. it makes it commercially palatable. 

No, and this was never the case.

 

But the whole concept of taste and high/middle/lowbrow art is interesting to think about lol. 

Absolutely not. Of course it's nice to see artists be successful with their artistry, but that has nothing to do with the overall quality of the music—nor is it indicative of it.

It used to be like that like 17 years ago, now every cringey basic trash can smash as long as it has the correct braindead chords, beat or idioctic melody ala Dance monkey...