Change: Artist? Industry? Technology?

A post that could be divisive, but really, I’m just asking questions…

Music is something that will always be developing and evolving, and thank goodness. That is something that I feel anyone can be grateful for. Don’t get me wrong, we can all appreciate the iconic sounds and songs of a specific decade or genre, but if we were all stuck in the same place, we would all get bored.

As technology develops, people are constantly finding new ways to create sound. They take their influences (old a new) and incorporate with the new ideas. For example, the break in "Funky Drummer" by James Brown has been sampled at least 1,500 times which just goes to show that with this kind of technology, we can pick and choose ideas and use them to our advantage as creators. Though this could become a challenge legally in terms of royalties and copyright, etc., recent developments in the industry have allowed us to develop an original idea into many more art pieces.

Furthermore, this huge development in technology in the studio, and at home, has changed the face of the industry once again. This generation has its own sounds — just like the iconic sound of disco or punk in the 70s or that large sounding 80s snare drum that’s so recognisable in generic 80s pop production. Nowadays, you can hear our generation’s version of that "pop" sound in almost every song in the chart. Or that same chord pattern that seems so irresistible to pop artists. Alternatively, you have many people learning how to use DAWs at home and have developed brilliant sounds from their bedroom. Something that this generation is doing well is incorporating electronic sounds with more organic, metal sounds to create this exciting new vibe/genre (electronicore) that has graced our ears.

However, a question I would like to ask (pointed more towards artists that have been "big" in the industry for quite a long time) is:

Do artists develop with themselves — through personal growth and preferences — or do they develop with the times?

I’ve just listened to P!nk’s new album Beautiful Trauma, and I thought rather than stating any opinion or writing a review, I would ask this question. This is mainly because I have always been a massive fan of P!nk due to her honest lyrics, insane vocal talent and overall personality. However, as time has progressed, I have noticed I enjoy her older music (Missundaztood-I’m Not Dead era) more than I enjoy this newer sound. You could argue that this is fresh, mature and fits well with the industry right now but… is that what it’s all about?

My initial thoughts are that this album is well produced technically, but over produced in terms of the epic "pop sound." Rather than using raw acoustic guitar licks, everything sounds clean and processed. Although the piano tracks are rawer and more "down to earth," I feel as a listener, you miss out on some of the intimacy that should be there. With the talent that P!nk possess, I’m not entirely sure this pop production is needed — especially with the raw, personal lyrical content that surfaces the whole album.

That being said, I wonder if P!nk herself has made this decision to sound this way, or whether it’s her label? I wonder if it is her goal to change as the industry does or weather it’s a corporate thing? For instance, when she first came about, she had a vibrant R&B kind of sound that was very popular in the late 90s and early noughties. This then moved on to more "kick arse" pop that seemed like a massive "F***k you" to the other main stream pop stars for the fact that she is far more individual — which was one of her unique selling points as an artist. Has she lost that individuality as times have moved on? Or has she matured? Sure, her image and personality is still as kick arse as before but has she lost sight slightly? I’d like to think the answer is no. But... she is a big-time star, and she has to keep up with these sales. If this is what will sell in 2017, then so be it. I’m just not 100% sure I love it like I used to. The same thing has happened with Taylor… country star has turned into this new bad-ass b**ch that throws shade at other artists through her songs. But it sells! On the other hand, if we look towards Miley Cyrus as an example, she has chopped and changed her style since the death of Hannah Montana and this relates back to my original question.

Has she changed with the times, or with her own personal growth and style?

She has always stated that growing up in the public eye has affected the way she expresses herself in her music and/or in the media and it is easy to see that she has been through some alterations throughout her life. Her albums and her behaviour have made statements and have got people talking which, I think, is a great achievement weather you’re a fan of the music or not. She has also worked with producers (like Mike Will) that have helped craft her sound into something a little "edgier" (so to speak) in comparison to Beautiful Trauma for example.

Her latest album Younger Now shows us that maybe she isn’t changing alongside the industry, but what she is truly influenced by. This new album is far more simplistic and has her true country influences tied into it. I can’t say I’m the biggest fan, but I haven’t loved many of her other albums. However, surely it makes a statement that says that when you are a big star, you can take the reins and do something you truly believe in. That being said, I also pose the question asking if she has been told to make this bold move in order to be talked about more? Particularly when her sister Noah is also rising as a star in her own right? Or has this fallen flat?

This post has mainly been me asking questions that I can’t really answer myself. I don’t like being disappointed by new music when I have been a die-hard fan for so many years. I also don’t want to label anyone as a sell out when really their opinions and influences can change. I think people forget that sometimes…

Newest Release from P!nk

Newest Release from Miley Cyrus

...just a bit different to "Love Story."