CreateDebate


Debate Info

31
28
Pop Music is inferior Pop music is NOT inferior
Debate Score:59
Arguments:35
Total Votes:64
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Pop Music is inferior (16)
 
 Pop music is NOT inferior (19)

Debate Creator

Monarchist(13) pic



Is Pop Music inferior to Classical Music ?

Do you think Pop music is inferior to Classical Music ? 

Pop Music is inferior

Side Score: 31
VS.

Pop music is NOT inferior

Side Score: 28

Pop Music is inferior to Classical Music because it has not yet withstood the test of time. Maybe a 100 years from now people will look back and consider Lady Gaga one of the greatest classical artists of our time..... but I wouldn't hold my breath.... although...., I do like Bad Romance ;)

Side: Pop Music is inferior
Bohemian(3861) Disputed
3 points

Pop Music is inferior to Classical Music because it has not yet withstood the test of time. Maybe a 100 years from now people will look back and consider Lady Gaga one of the greatest classical artists of our time..... but I wouldn't hold my breath.... although...., I do like Bad Romance ;)

Not, necessarily. We live in a tumultuous time. Technology and culture are changing at an exponential rate. 50 years then, could be equivalent to 5 years now. Not to mention the level of competition is much different. It's impossible to make a valid comparison on that basis.

Side: Pop music is NOT inferior

Yeah, but what about Lady Gaga's Bad Romance song? ; )

Side: Pop music is NOT inferior
3 points

As such matters are always relative, I believe pop music to be inferior. Pop music is refined and processed down to simple driving forces based on trends in the market. Classical music is far more difficult to define.

-

Modern pop music is refined to two basic elements, major and minor, OR happy and sad. These are the two simplest and most basic modal scales ever implemented, and as such require little education to preform. Classical music has been much more free, incorporating not only all modes, but far more atypical scales and complex rhythmic theory. The tones created by these scales are not found in pop music. Also, though rare, it is notable to point out that classical music has created composures in different temperaments, meaning that harmonies have been created which are impossible and nonexistent in the modern 12 tone pop scale. Only very few recent bands have tried to utilize classical components, and they are not noted in the mainstream market. Pop music simply cannot match the variety that classical music has founded, and as such it is simpler.

Side: Pop Music is inferior
3 points

It does not possess the nuances and indeed quality of classical music. However, this is a subjective debate.

Side: Pop Music is inferior
3 points

Pop music is always having to change to keep peoples' interest, but classical music can be varied but doesn't necessarily have to completely change to keep its beauty. There are tons of synthesizer sounds you can make but only a few instruments you can truly appreciate.

Side: Pop Music is inferior
2 points

I would argue that pop music is inferior to most forms of music, actually.

Side: Pop Music is inferior

Hell yes! I dare Lady Gaga or Justin Bieber to make something better than Mozart or Beethoven.

Side: Pop Music is inferior

We cannot conceive how something so subjectively appreciated as a music genre could be thus compared to another. Music is a form of art, the conveyance of emotion and sentiment. Pop music does so, arguably in a more lucid fashion than classical. We tend to listen to both, and never prefer Bad Romance to Canon in D based solely upon the genre.

We submit that any contrary position is a pointlessly conservative one, and that such a stance has never been conducive to the progression of Art. As a case example, some of today's most highly valued paintings were created by a group of writers whose unconventional styles saw them branded by the critics of the time as Les Fauves (A French term meaning "wildcats" - or tan/tawny).

Side: Pop music is NOT inferior
2 points

Here was my initial argument:

"If you accept that some art is better than other art then I don't see how you could deny the superiority of classical music. And I do think it's fair to say that art can be good or bad. My mom possesses a small piece of paper containing a mass of scribbles which bears the title, Giraffe. I produced this work when I was three. I think it's safe to say that that particular work of art is inferior to, say, the Mona Lisa.

Pop music, in general, is created mainly for commercial purposes -- this is the primary source of its flaws. It tends to be boring, derivative slop aimed at the lowest common denominator. There's little artistry involved. Classical music does not have a very high bar to clear, and it does so with ease."

-----

But then I thought -- I am comparing the best of classical music (the stuff people think of when they think "classial music") to average modern music. To be fair I would need to compare the best classical to the best pop.

Hmm...

According to this site the best three pop songs of all time are:

"Imagine" by John Lennon

"Born to Run" by Bruce Springsteen

and "(I can't get no) Satisfaction" by the Rolling Stones.

According to this, the three best classical songs are:

"Symphony No. 9 in D Minor (Ode To Joy)" by Ludwig van Beethoven

"Clair de Lune" by Claude Debussy

and "Rhapsody in Blue" by George Gershwin

Hmm, ok, so this is getting complicated. For one thing, those "pop" songs are not what I think of when I think "pop" -- I would call those rock songs. But I guess it would be hard to draw a line between the two genres. So let's just let "pop" mean a more modern style and "classical" mean an older style.

And now I think I have to give the edge to pop music. None of those classical songs had nearly the effect that "Born to Run" had on me in my younger days. "Imagine" would also beat the classical works by the same metric. But then, my perception is skewed by a maelstrom of social and cultural forces.

I do think a proper answer could be arrived at here, but it would take a wise and experienced critic to do so. Acknowledging my limited ability of discernment, I would guess that modern music is better. I think if classical music were really so great, then that's what I would listen to. But I don't, and that seems to hint that it ain't all that.

Side: Pop music is NOT inferior
1 point

Pop music, in general, is created mainly for commercial purposes

As was classical music, in it's time.

Side: Pop music is NOT inferior
jessald(1915) Disputed
1 point

I knew you were gonna say that.

I thought about adding a note that even if many classical pieces were written with a profit motive in mind, the environment in which they were produced did not enforce mediocrity with nearly the same ferocity as the modern music industry.

But then I decided such a note wasn't necessary. Silly me.

Side: Pop music is NOT inferior
GroovyNerd(8) Disputed
1 point

That's a pretty good approach, and not a bad argument for modern music. Bear in mind, though, that pop music is built to hook in your head, and to appeal more to a general audience. I'm not saying you're wrong. But I base my judgement on the intent behind the music. The majority of current pop stars are not in any way required to be talented, or even to have a nice voice. They have to look good, and present an image that the record companies like. Many of them have their songs written for them, which usually consist of little more than a repetetive four-chord progression and an electronic beat. My own bias aside, I feel bad supporting pop music, because it is just what the public wants. And currently, what the public wants is a catch phrase or two and a steady beat. I really enjoy some older pop, and there is even an occasional modern pop song that I tolerate. But in general, today's pop music isn't treated as an art form. It's just a moneymaker.

Side: Pop Music is inferior
2 points

Pop music is merely the most commercially successful music of its time. Swing and Jazz were pop during its time. The Beatles and Elvis were pop.

And Classical music was popular at its time.

Considering that it was also the only music of its time, it's kind of lame to suggest that it's more superior to music of our time. Music is music, and as soon as people understand that the shit they're listening to is nothing special, the more we will all be able to get along and not sweat over bullshit.

A rant

Side: Pop music is NOT inferior
2 points

pop music is awesome in its own style. and so is classical. many people prefer classical over pop, and the other way round. there is no comparison.

Side: Pop music is NOT inferior

It depends on your taste.

Popular music is defined as music that is popular with the public at a certain time. Classical music was popular in its time.

It is difficult to compare modern pop music with tradition classical music as they are two very different styles.

Side: Pop music is NOT inferior
1 point

I feel this is an odd argument to make; while both are music, pop and classical music are very different.

Besides, there is no real definition here of 'classical'. Do the avant-garde pieces from the 20th century and such like count as classical music? What constitutes 'pop' music anyway?

There are many differences, too, in the structure of these two different genres. While classical relies on scales and octaves, most pop music is built around chord progressions.

I cannot see how pop could be compared to classical music, and so I shall say that pop is not inferior simply because of this.

Personally, I like both.

Side: Pop music is NOT inferior

The only reason I have to say that pop music is to inferior is that personally, I happen to prefer pop music. It has an effect on me; songs with upbeat instruments and melodies put me in a good mood, whereas classical music just goes in one ear and out the other. I've tried to have a good attitude about it before, but I just can't find anything interesting about it, for me anyway. Maybe the composers worked harder than modern artists do, and I totally respect that...but it doesn't really impress me, exactly. I guess it's just that I don't personally want to spend all my time creating something magnificent, and I'm not saying that in a bad way--it's just how I am. But yeah, everything's subjective, you know?

Side: Pop music is NOT inferior
1 point

Pop music has soulful, meaningful lyrics (depending on the type. There's Ed Sheeran and then there's Lady Gaga). They can be inspiring and make you happy. Classical music makes me want to sleep and there are no words!

Side: Pop music is NOT inferior

Pop music uses Classical music as an influence, so, Pop music is not inferior.

Side: Pop music is NOT inferior
-1 points

Is Pop Music inferior to Classical Music?

Pop music is superior to Classical music. It is faster, catchier and better to listen to. Classical music is boring and gay.

Side: Pop music is NOT inferior
2 points

You really are delusional aren't you ? As I Christian I'm embarrassed to see that your name is christjesus. Could you please keep your mouth shut and not make the rest of us look bad.

Side: Pop Music is inferior