Music: Taylor Swift dropping a sister album to Folklore tonight

[tarheelhockey]

Once she started opening her mouth to talk politics she quickly went downhill.

So basically you're saying "went downhill" has nothing to do with her music and everything to do with your political biases?

 

[The Crypto Guy]

So basically you're saying "went downhill" has nothing to do with her music and everything to do with your political biases?

Well her music sucked when she left country and went to pop. That better?

 

[SirClintonPortis]

Talking politics has nothing to do with musical skill. Beethoven had his leanings too and certain sometimes wrote to promote those causes. The incidental music for Egmont is one such work. One may reject the cause while still understanding the musical skill of the music-maker.

 

[tarheelhockey]

I don't think you listen to Taylor Swift if you say she hasn't changed as an artist. She went from country, to full out pop to now indie type music. Her sound is no where near the same as it was when she was making country albums.

To my ear, she's barely changed at all. Especially since she dropped the country flavor and went into straight pop, which is basically where she still is now. Her "indie type" music is still pop music, it just has a very slightly more adult-contemporary flavor.

Thing is, there's really nothing wrong with staying in the same range of the spectrum. I don't think anyone wants to see her put out a rap album or something. It's simply that she takes a very formulaic approach which is both inoffensive and forgettable.

FWIW, I'm not reflexively against her. I think she's done some songs which are formulaic in the right way. "You Belong with Me" is a good example of that.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Well her music sucked when she left country and went to pop. That better?

I agree.

 

[JetsWillFly4Ever]

To my ear, she's barely changed at all. Especially since she dropped the country flavor and went into straight pop, which is basically where she still is now. Her "indie type" music is still pop music, it just has a very slightly more adult-contemporary flavor.

Thing is, there's really nothing wrong with staying in the same range of the spectrum. I don't think anyone wants to see her put out a rap album or something. It's simply that she takes a very formulaic approach which is both inoffensive and forgettable.

FWIW, I'm not reflexively against her. I think she's done some songs which are formulaic in the right way. "You Belong with Me" is a good example of that.

I mean no disrespect, but listen to Reputation/1989 then listen to Folklore. If you think those are the same type of music, then I guess you just have a much larger definition of pop music than I do. They have completely different sounds.

 

[Gordon Lightfoot]

A few observations from this thread, definitely just for fun:

I enjoyed Folklore and I like her in general, though I don't love her.

I think it's funny to rip on her for releasing formulaic music, and see that contrasted (different posts, I know) with... AC/DC, who is possibly the most formulaic rock band ever. It feels like they only wrote two songs.

Unsure why she "knows nothing about politics." That's a huge assumption. Because it's impossible to follow/care about politics AND make music?

The cynic in me saw the title and cover of that Timberlake album and rolled my eyes. Of COURSE you just make an "Americana", sorta country-tinged album because it's easy and country is the biggest/2nd biggest genre and you'd be passing up some easy money if you didn't make a country album.

 

[tarheelhockey]

I think it's funny to rip on her for releasing formulaic music, and see that contrasted (different posts, I know) with... AC/DC, who is possibly the most formulaic rock band ever. It feels like they only wrote two songs.

I think there are two different things going on here... there's the matter of formulaic songwriting, and then there's this forum's preference for rock over pop. Those two ideas overlapped in a single sentiment in the OP.

In general, I do think it's fair to say that there's a pretty heavy cultural bias toward calling pop acts "generic" and rock acts "creative" even when the objective evidence says otherwise.

 

[Spring in Fialta]

I didn't expect the AC/DC comment to take on so much attention

All I meant is that I know the musical sensibilities of a large portion of the entertainment forum doesn't typically lean into the realm of Taylor Swift, so this announcement may not hold much weight with a majority, but for those who do enjoy her music its a pretty intriguing development.

My favorite bands are Tool, Deftones and The Mars Volta, so Taylor Swift is far outside of my musical sensibilities too and I definitely held a lot of the earlier stated opinions on her music until 1989 came out.

1989 is actually a remarkable pop album and is arguably one of the best pop albums ever done. The production and layering of rhythms, sounds and melodies is a stroke of genius. It made me go back and revisit her catalogue and find out that there is a lot of really good content, even on the earlier bubblegum stuff. Really, she has mastered making some poppy, radio friendly, stuff that appeals and gets people to buy in and its in the grit of the album where her good material is.

But even if you didn't like 1989 and other offerings, Folklore really is completely different. She definitely isn't formulaic on the majority of her music (radio hits excluded) and I don't think you get to partner with Aaron Dessner of The National and Justin Vernon to create not one, but two albums, if you lack substance, depth and musical value.

The National and Bon Iver basically dominate a genre that is outside of Taylor Swifts musical journey prior to Folklore and they were excited to partner and collaborate to conceive these albums. I think that does make a statement about the quality of music that she has and can create. Neither of those bands need the added attention of the Taylor Swift fan base and even if they did, I don't know if it would resonate with them in a meaningful way to make it a marketing ploy.

And.. she absolutely can use her platform and fame to speak politically and talk about issues that are relevant to her. That is within her rights and nobody should be told to stick to sports, or music, or whatever else because you don't like what they have to say. She is passionate about women's rights and if she wants to promote political candidates that are also pro-women's rights, she gets to do that.

Well, I'm not that familiar with AC/DC and the little I know did nothing for me either way, so don't worry.

After your original post, I went and checked out songs from Folklore, including the Justin Vernon stuff. I'm no technician and am only a listener, but I really didn't see it. It wasn't terrible (well, it was better than the pure pop tracks) but it also just kind of...there. And whether other more 'serious' bands want to work for her for reasons known and unknown is never something that I've found myself terribly concerned with. Everyone is their own person with their own sensibilities and their own reasons (career related or not) to do one thing or another. As a faceless listener, all I can do is judge what I can - the final product. Why this guy or that gal did this or that doesn't resonate with me (well, unless the final result works or is interesting in one way or another) and just to be a cheeky dick, she also does have that Jack Antonoff fellow always with her, and he's part of the worst mainstream band of the last decade (Fun.) so ah!

In all seriousness, I'm not meaning to bash you or anything, I just always have my curiosity piqued when people at large/thorough music listeners hype a pop star's veer into, for lack of a better word, musical credibility.

 

[SirClintonPortis]

I mean no disrespect, but listen to Reputation/1989 then listen to Folklore. If you think those are the same type of music, then I guess you just have a much larger definition of pop music than I do. They have completely different sounds.

"Pop" is often a lazy derogatory term utilized by snobs of all sorts of talent levels(even musicians of high competence like Beethoven condemned Rossini because the lighter style and invasion into audience into the mind's of the Viennese public ticked him off) to condemn a style instead of any sort of real critique of the ability of a songwriter to string notes in an effective manner. Or in the case of a singer, execute the notes or for the really advanced musicians, vary the notes while not compromising the identify of the song.

One can get a lot done even when sticking to form. There were a lot of sonata-allegro first movement written, of varying character, but their "form" was more consistent than inconsistent for 50 or so years.

If non-conformist songwriting is what someone wants, Roy Orbison would be up at the top of the list, thanks his non-formal, mostly raw talent background.

 

[Spring in Fialta]

"Pop" is often a lazy derogatory term utilized by snobs of all sorts of talent levels(even musicians of high competence like Beethoven condemned Rossini because the lighter style and invasion into audience into the mind's of the Viennese public ticked him off) to condemn a style instead of any sort of real critique of the ability of a songwriter to string notes in an effective manner. Or in the case of a singer, execute the notes or for the really advanced musicians, vary the notes while not compromising the identify of the song.

One can get a lot done even when sticking to form. There were a lot of sonata-allegro first movement written, of varying character, but their "form" was more consistent than inconsistent for 50 or so years.

If non-conformist songwriting is what someone wants, Roy Orbison would be up at the top of the list, thanks his non-formal, mostly raw talent background.

Roy Orbison was awesome.

 

[Gordon Lightfoot]

I think there are two different things going on here... there's the matter of formulaic songwriting, and then there's this forum's preference for rock over pop. Those two ideas overlapped in a single sentiment in the OP.

In general, I do think it's fair to say that there's a pretty heavy cultural bias toward calling pop acts "generic" and rock acts "creative" even when the objective evidence says otherwise.

Right, definitely agree on all counts there.