|
Originally Posted by truncated
I'm going to be shot for this.
If you're comparing 'experimental' to 'mainstream' (a generic and fallible comparison as it is, so take this all with a grain of salt), in many cases, producing something commercially successful is much more difficult to do.
If you cut away all the bullshit, experimental music is a license for free rein. You have no standards up to which your music is held, no precedents to follow, and no structure to adhere to. You can throw together any combination of sound and method and conceivably fall into the experimental category. Granted, some artists produce more aurally intriguing work than others, but by definition of 'experimental,' any asshole can say, "Right, this sounds weird, I'm like, creative 'n that."
You venture into popular music, and there are (albeit misguided at times) definitive standards and structures there. Very few artists churn out popular music that has substance enough to be both massively appealing and stand the test of time. While some of the elements that result in this - memorable lyrics, catchy bass lines, momentous guitar riffs, etc. - seem stock, it is in actuality quite difficult to make a truly "good" popular album. Think of how few rock, pop, and rap artists have longevity within their respective genres.
This is why I pick the Beastie Boys. Not only did they forge some serious new frontiers with 'white rap,' but they consistently put out good albums. They retained the core of their style, musically evolving over time without either straying too much from their roots or stagnating. They were and still are popular for all the right reasons, and this is an almost unheard of feat achieved by musicians, regardless of genre.
|