Kind of like a Disco Demolition Night, but only using EDM records instead! I personally think electronic music is so ubiquitous that we need an overhaul. It would be awesome if we could destroy EDM's legacy in popular music!

The whole EDM-downfall thing is going to happen - the only thing constant is change - but I don't know when it's gonna happen. Seriously, electronic synth-heavy music has been dominant since 2006 or 2007.

Does anyone else want this? I do! I think it's bewildering how little rebellion there is among youth. I would love for the musical market to become diverse again.

Disappointing ly enough, many early 2010s artists are still cool today. If Lady Gaga, Lesha, or Katy Perry were to release a new single today, it would be wildly successful, and they wouldn't even have to innovate.

At this point in 1995, most early '90s artists had become lame and passé. Any artists that did find success had to drastically change their style in order to cater to extremely fickle consumer tastes. Just look at Mary J. Blige! Her album "What's the 411?" is practically an entirely different decade away from "My Life".

Now, Kesha could make a hit song that sounds exactly the same as it did during the "Animal" era. Lady Gaga never really moved away from "The Fame". Katy Perry's " Prism" is just a "Teenage Dream" 2.0, even though she said she wouldn't do it. She also said her third album was going to be much darker than her second one. That didn't happen.

It seems that the music industry is still stuck in the year 2009. Some people think the rest of the 2010s is going to be exactly the same as what has been happening before. Gee, 11 years of the exact same music. Sounds boring.

Kind of like a Disco Demolition Night, but only using EDM records instead!

So what you're saying is that you want to disrupt another baseball game just like they did 35 years ago?

So what you're saying is that you want to disrupt another baseball game just like they did 35 years ago?


It's a theory. I myself am not going to actually do it. I'm just saying it would be interesting to have something similar to that again. And besides, who's to say that it has to be a baseball game?

I feel like EDM was waned since 2012. Its just slow jams and house music now.

It's a theory. I myself am not going to actually do it. I'm just saying it would be interesting to have something similar to that again. And besides, who's to say that it has to be a baseball game?


Things are different like they were in 1979 compared to now in 2015.

Things are different like they were in 1979 compared to now in 2015.


Of course it's different. In 1979, there were still successful rock songs on the charts. Now, every single song that successful has an electronic sound in it!

If anything, an electronic music rebellion is more justified today than a disco rebellion was back then! Unfortunately, no one wants to do it. They think we should all conform and take what we're given, instead of making what we want.

Now, we respond to the music industry. Before, the music industry responded to the people.

I wish America was more like the UK. British artists are given significantly more freedom to do what they desire with their music. American artists, on the other hand, have to do what their labels tell them to do, otherwise they become victims to career homicide.

Expect zero promotion from a major label if you don't do electronic music these days. That is not right.

Kind of like a Disco Demolition Night, but only using EDM records instead! I personally think electronic music is so ubiquitous that we need an overhaul. It would be awesome if we could destroy EDM's legacy in popular music!

Disco Demolition Night was most likely not just targeted against the style of music itself, but the culture associated with it.  As the industry was mostly driven by gays and African Americans (who weren't nearly as accepted in the 70s as today), in stark contrast to all-American rock & roll, much of the backlash against disco came from prejudice.  It's one thing to personally dislike a style of music, but to go as far as to hijack a baseball game and vandalize copies of the music is taking it to a much more uncomfortable extreme.  Hair metal and snap music, both drawn out by the end of their mainstream runs, never suffered the same level of hostility that disco did; they were just phased out by new musical trends like grunge and EDM, respectively.  Even late 90s boybands didn't receive quite the same level of punishment, as much as people started to dislike them.

The whole EDM-downfall thing is going to happen - the only thing constant is change - but I don't know when it's gonna happen. Seriously, electronic synth-heavy music has been dominant since 2006 or 2007.

I'd say more since 2009, but it definitely is the dominant style of music, and I will at least agree with you that the mainstream charts are starting to lack variety as of late, mostly due to the fact that even guitar-based rock and roll as we know it has been infiltrated by synth pop influences.

Does anyone else want this? I do! I think it's bewildering how little rebellion there is among youth. I would love for the musical market to become diverse again.

You really don't think this generation has no sense of rebellion?  With the dominant of hipster culture, social commentary via online blogs and services, and social issues dominating headlines more than they ever have since the 60s, the world of 2015 is completely forged out of rebellion by the youth.

I wish America was more like the UK. British artists are given significantly more freedom to do what they desire with their music. American artists, on the other hand, have to do what their labels tell them to do, otherwise they become victims to career homicide.

Great Britain has just as much mainstream pop music as the United States, it's just that most Americans only know about the classic rock and indie/alternative groups like Radiohead, Coldplay, and the Beatles.  Artists like Robbie Williams, Girls Aloud, and Kylie Minogue are just as radio-friendly in Europe as Katy Perry and Taylor Swift are in the United States, even though they've seen little to no success across the pond.  In fact, electronic dance music has pretty much dominated British airwaves since the 90s, and it only continues to be relevant today.  Also, let's not forget groups like One Direction and the Spice Girls, both of which hail from merry old England.

The United States has plenty of groups who have received massive acclaim in recent times, like The Strokes, Vampire Weekend, and the Black Keys.  Americans today don't just listen to EDM artists, just as the British weren't always tuning into the Beatles, Oasis, and the Arctic Monkeys.

Of course it's different. In 1979, there were still successful rock songs on the charts. Now, every single song that successful has an electronic sound in it!

If anything, an electronic music rebellion is more justified today than a disco rebellion was back then! Unfortunately, no one wants to do it. They think we should all conform and take what we're given, instead of making what we want.

Now, we respond to the music industry. Before, the music industry responded to the people.


But who will take charge of this rebellion?

Disco Demolition Night was most likely not just targeted against the style of music itself, but the culture associated with it.  As the industry was mostly driven by gays and African Americans (who weren't nearly as accepted in the 70s as today), in stark contrast to all-American rock & roll, much of the backlash against disco came from prejudice.  It's one thing to personally dislike a style of music, but to go as far as to hijack a baseball game and vandalize copies of the music is taking it to a much more uncomfortable extreme.  Hair metal and snap music, both drawn out by the end of their mainstream runs, never suffered the same level of hostility that disco did; they were just phased out by new musical trends like grunge and EDM, respectively.  Even late 90s boybands didn't receive quite the same level of punishment, as much as people started to dislike them.


The culture associated with electronic music is exactly like the disco culture! In the past four years, there has been a dramatic rise in the use of Molly (pure MDMA; the descendant of ecstasy). This makes sense, as a lot of the songs on the radio these days you have to be high to enjoy them. And actually, the gay audience didn't come in until post-SNF. The disco scene was mostly Black and Latin audiences, because that music was derived from black and latin music.


I'd say more since 2009, but it definitely is the dominant style of music, and I will at least agree with you that the mainstream charts are starting to lack variety as of late, mostly due to the fact that even guitar-based rock and roll as we know it has been infiltrated by synth pop influences.


There's a reason I said 2006. It doesn't matter if it's EDM, or pop, or rock, or hip-hop. If synthesizers are used in the instrumentals, it's electronic. Since the mid 2000's, mainstream music has been dominated by synthesizers. It's been electronic for about a decade now. It's just that it was crunk in 2006 and now it's EDM and trap. Doesn't anyone notice the similarities between "synthesizer" and "synthetic"? 2006-2015 (so far...) has been the electronic/synthpop/computerized music era. Just three years before the beginning, back in 2003, the industry was using real instruments.

Pop cultural trends should last about five years at the longest, three at the shortest. Since 2006 started the current trend, music should have changed in 2011, had the trend lasted it's longest. At it's shortest, music should have changed in 2009.


You really don't think this generation has no sense of rebellion?  With the dominant of hipster culture, social commentary via online blogs and services, and social issues dominating headlines more than they ever have since the 60s, the world of 2015 is completely forged out of rebellion by the youth.


Hipsters are outdated, especially among those born in the mid and late 1990s onwards. No, the world of 2015 is not forged out of rebellion. The youth of today are doing and saying exactly what the media (gossip magazines, celebrities, newspapers, tabloids, blogs, websites, top journalists, organizations) and public school education system are telling them. And it's not the 1960's, it the early 1970's. Rebellion is defined as open resistance against established authority. There is no rebellion in popular culture, and social activism is just people doing what is expected of them. None of this is surprising. Back in 2007, this attitude was rebellion, but now it is the norm.


Great Britain has just as much mainstream pop music as the United States, it's just that most Americans only know about the classic rock and indie/alternative groups like Radiohead, Coldplay, and the Beatles.  Artists like Robbie Williams, Girls Aloud, and Kylie Minogue are just as radio-friendly in Europe as Katy Perry and Taylor Swift are in the United States, even though they've seen little to no success across the pond.  In fact, electronic dance music has pretty much dominated British airwaves since the 90s, and it only continues to be relevant today.  Also, let's not forget groups like One Direction and the Spice Girls, both of which hail from merry old England.


Kylie Minogue has found success in the USA. Also, British people really do get more control over their music. If the UK was like the USA, Adele's second album would have been electronic, not soul. Also artists like Ed Sheeran and Ella Henderson wouldn't have been allowed to do what they wanted with their music either. "Thinking Out Loud" and "Ghost" would not have existed with the creative freedom that those artists were given. On the other hand, Rihanna say's she wants to make "timeless music", then a few days later she releases "Bitch Better Have My Money", which totally follows the trendy sound. Timeless, huh?


The United States has plenty of groups who have received massive acclaim in recent times, like The Strokes, Vampire Weekend, and the Black Keys.  Americans today don't just listen to EDM artists, just as the British weren't always tuning into the Beatles, Oasis, and the Arctic Monkeys.


Julian Casablancas can't sing, and Vampire Weekend is boring. That leaves only the Black Keys out as  the good band. I didn't say modern American's only listen to EDM, it's just that that's the only thing the radio stations play and that's what the young people listen to.

But who will take charge of this rebellion?


Every pop cultural trend, regardless of what it is, is always a reaction against what was big before. Kind of like how skinny jeans became popular in the mid 2000's after a decade of baggy jeans.

Like how grunge was a reaction against that horrible hair metal and how new wave became popular after years of elaborately made orchestraic disco tunes.

Since every new trend is supposed to be in reaction to what was cool right before, that means that the next big music trend would probably be more organic instrumental virtuosos. Imagine things like horns, bongos, congas, harps, acoustic guitars, cellos, violins, etc. Basically it would most likely have to be the opposite of what is cool right now and has been cool for the past nine or ten years.

I wouldn't be surprised if Latin, Reggae, Bossa Nova, Tropical, or Soul music were to be the next standard or whatever.

Disco Demolition Night was most likely not just targeted against the style of music itself, but the culture associated with it.  As the industry was mostly driven by gays and African Americans (who weren't nearly as accepted in the 70s as today), in stark contrast to all-American rock & roll, much of the backlash against disco came from prejudice.  It's one thing to personally dislike a style of music, but to go as far as to hijack a baseball game and vandalize copies of the music is taking it to a much more uncomfortable extreme.  Hair metal and snap music, both drawn out by the end of their mainstream runs, never suffered the same level of hostility that disco did; they were just phased out by new musical trends like grunge and EDM, respectively.  Even late 90s boybands didn't receive quite the same level of punishment, as much as people started to dislike them.

I'd say more since 2009, but it definitely is the dominant style of music, and I will at least agree with you that the mainstream charts are starting to lack variety as of late, mostly due to the fact that even guitar-based rock and roll as we know it has been infiltrated by synth pop influences.

You really don't think this generation has no sense of rebellion?  With the dominant of hipster culture, social commentary via online blogs and services, and social issues dominating headlines more than they ever have since the 60s, the world of 2015 is completely forged out of rebellion by the youth.

Great Britain has just as much mainstream pop music as the United States, it's just that most Americans only know about the classic rock and indie/alternative groups like Radiohead, Coldplay, and the Beatles.  Artists like Robbie Williams, Girls Aloud, and Kylie Minogue are just as radio-friendly in Europe as Katy Perry and Taylor Swift are in the United States, even though they've seen little to no success across the pond.  In fact, electronic dance music has pretty much dominated British airwaves since the 90s, and it only continues to be relevant today.  Also, let's not forget groups like One Direction and the Spice Girls, both of which hail from merry old England.

The United States has plenty of groups who have received massive acclaim in recent times, like The Strokes, Vampire Weekend, and the Black Keys.  Americans today don't just listen to EDM artists, just as the British weren't always tuning into the Beatles, Oasis, and the Arctic Monkeys.
Yes true Gays weren't accepted in the disco era but they weren't very accepted as recently as the 1990's either. You think Disco died because it was associated with Black Culture? To me that's very debatable. From my understanding Disco was everywhere in the late 1970's and some people couldn't stand that and that's why something like "Disco Demolition Night" happened. It is true that urban music in 1981-1982 was basically banned from Top 40 radio unless your name was Lionel Richie, Michael Jackson, or Diana Ross. But on the other side a singer like Donna Summer who basically was big at the peak of the disco era(1978-1979) and probably discos biggest act wasn't backlashed as much in 1981-1982 as the disco trend as a whole.  She was still making hits in 1982 ok maybe she wasn't as popular as she was in 1978-1979 but she was still making hits. Her 3 hits in 1982 peaked at #10, #33, and #41 on the Billboard Hot 100. Even in 1983 "She Works Hard For the Money" peaked  at #3 on the Billboard Hot 100. "There Goes My Baby" peaked at #21 in 1984. "This Time I Know Its For Real" peaked at #7 in 1989.

The culture associated with electronic music is exactly like the disco culture! In the past four years, there has been a dramatic rise in the use of Molly (pure MDMA; the descendant of ecstasy). This makes sense, as a lot of the songs on the radio these days you have to be high to enjoy them. And actually, the gay audience didn't come in until post-SNF. The disco scene was mostly Black and Latin audiences, because that music was derived from black and latin music.

There's a reason I said 2006. It doesn't matter if it's EDM, or pop, or rock, or hip-hop. If synthesizers are used in the instrumentals, it's electronic. Since the mid 2000's, mainstream music has been dominated by synthesizers. It's been electronic for about a decade now. It's just that it was crunk in 2006 and now it's EDM and trap. Doesn't anyone notice the similarities between "synthesizer" and "synthetic"? 2006-2015 (so far...) has been the electronic/synthpop/computerized music era. Just three years before the beginning, back in 2003, the industry was using real instruments.

Pop cultural trends should last about five years at the longest, three at the shortest. Since 2006 started the current trend, music should have changed in 2011, had the trend lasted it's longest. At it's shortest, music should have changed in 2009.

Hipsters are outdated, especially among those born in the mid and late 1990s onwards. No, the world of 2015 is not forged out of rebellion. The youth of today are doing and saying exactly what the media (gossip magazines, celebrities, newspapers, tabloids, blogs, websites, top journalists, organizations) and public school education system are telling them. And it's not the 1960's, it the early 1970's. Rebellion is defined as open resistance against established authority. There is no rebellion in popular culture, and social activism is just people doing what is expected of them. None of this is surprising. Back in 2007, this attitude was rebellion, but now it is the norm.

Kylie Minogue has found success in the USA. Also, British people really do get more control over their music. If the UK was like the USA, Adele's second album would have been electronic, not soul. Also artists like Ed Sheeran and Ella Henderson wouldn't have been allowed to do what they wanted with their music either. "Thinking Out Loud" and "Ghost" would not have existed with the creative freedom that those artists were given. On the other hand, Rihanna say's she wants to make "timeless music", then a few days later she releases "Bitch Better Have My Money", which totally follows the trendy sound. Timeless, huh?

Julian Casablancas can't sing, and Vampire Weekend is boring. That leaves only the Black Keys out as  the good band. I didn't say modern American's only listen to EDM, it's just that that's the only thing the radio stations play and that's what the young people listen to.
Well Italian-Americans were very into the disco era too I think.

So wait it doesn't matter what genre or musical trend it is you want synthesizers to be done with? Ok but you can't say Lady Gaga sounds like a snap rapper from early 2008 or whatever. I do agree though the industry move from the "synth sound" if you will. Yeah but music did change in late 2008 with electro-pop replacing rap as the dominant musical trend. True maybe music should have done a more drastic change in 2012-2013 than it did but it didn't unfortunately.

Well, "B**ch Better Have My Money" sounds like a song title from the 2000's anyway.

Electropop isn't going anywhere until at least 2017 or 2018. Musical trends take a while to fade out. It generally takes decade for a music and popular culture to be obsolete and be completely replaced.

You think Disco died because it was associated with Black Culture?

disco died because it was time for a change.

It seems that the music industry is still stuck in the year 2009. Some people think the rest of the 2010s is going to be exactly the same as what has been happening before. Gee, 11 years of the exact same music. Sounds boring.


I disagree.  The current sound began in late 2011 and is distinct from the early late '00s electropop.  Today we are more in the era of Carly Rae Jepsen and Ariana Grande than Lady Gaga and Kesha.  The early stuff was new.  It was exciting.  It was fresh.  It also pushed the boundaries.  Today's EDM-influenced pop is so watered down and boring and plays everything safe.

I also disagree that synth-based music became dominant in 2006.  While rock music using real instruments remained popular through most of the '00s, hip-hop and pop was electronic even going back into the late '90s.

The culture associated with electronic music is exactly like the disco culture! In the past four years, there has been a dramatic rise in the use of Molly (pure MDMA; the descendant of ecstasy). This makes sense, as a lot of the songs on the radio these days you have to be high to enjoy them. And actually, the gay audience didn't come in until post-SNF. The disco scene was mostly Black and Latin audiences, because that music was derived from black and latin music.

I agree there are direct parallels between EDM and disco, as the former is just as heavily propelled adolescents and gays as disco was in the 70s.  Also, SNF definitely fueled the disco backlash, considering the genre went from just one form of pop music from 1973-1976 to completely inescapable in 1977-1979.  The presence of emasculate, gleeful musical acts like the Village People in 1978 I think contributed towards the rage against disco culture in general, as it just seemed shallow to the fans of punk, new wave, and country, who were growing increasingly unsatisfied with the world's dysfunction (it was the Carter era, after all) and looked to minority-driven cultures like disco as their scapegoat.

There's a reason I said 2006. It doesn't matter if it's EDM, or pop, or rock, or hip-hop. If synthesizers are used in the instrumentals, it's electronic. Since the mid 2000's, mainstream music has been dominated by synthesizers. It's been electronic for about a decade now. It's just that it was crunk in 2006 and now it's EDM and trap. Doesn't anyone notice the similarities between "synthesizer" and "synthetic"? 2006-2015 (so far...) has been the electronic/synthpop/computerized music era. Just three years before the beginning, back in 2003, the industry was using real instruments.

Well, synthesizers have been the norm in a lot of popular music since the early 80s.  It's just that beginning with Lady Gaga, far more emphasis was placed on synthesizers as melodic soundscapes, backed up by a pounding beat.  Producers like The-Dream and Lil Jon used synth melodies as well, but their sound was a lot more minimalistic and stood in stark contrast to the occasional euro dance hit like Everytime We Touch.

Pop cultural trends should last about five years at the longest, three at the shortest. Since 2006 started the current trend, music should have changed in 2011, had the trend lasted it's longest. At it's shortest, music should have changed in 2009.

EDM had its roots in club genres that thrived several years before 2009, but it wasn't until Lady Gaga made her debut that it turned into a mainstream phenomenon.  Like I said, the entire global atmosphere was changing dramatically around the latter half of 2008, and the dying sociopolitical trends took down old music trends like snap, emo, and post-grunge with them.  Popular music was suddenly far less urban-influenced and much more house and trance-influenced, even amongst 00s r&b heavyweights like Usher, Akon, and the Black Eyed Peas.

Hipsters are outdated, especially among those born in the mid and late 1990s onwards. No, the world of 2015 is not forged out of rebellion. The youth of today are doing and saying exactly what the media (gossip magazines, celebrities, newspapers, tabloids, blogs, websites, top journalists, organizations) and public school education system are telling them. And it's not the 1960's, it the early 1970's. Rebellion is defined as open resistance against established authority. There is no rebellion in popular culture, and social activism is just people doing what is expected of them. None of this is surprising. Back in 2007, this attitude was rebellion, but now it is the norm.

That last part drives my point home.  Intense discussion about social issues was not nearly as nationally prevalent in the 2000s as it is today, making it a definitive trend of the 2010s decade.  The cultural 60s died when conservative backlash eroded hippie influence in the early 70s, and the 2010s mindset will probably be killed off from the mainstream in the same way as these constant social movements begin to implode.  Though backlash against modern attitudes is definitely prevalent, it isn't yet coherent enough to herald a decline of these feelings.  It doesn't matter if protest is fueled by mass media or not, it's still rebellion, and being widely prevalent doesn't make it any less rebellious than other times.  I just think we've become so accustomed to the level of social debate ushered in by social media that suddenly it no longer feels shocking or against the trend.

Kylie Minogue has found success in the USA. Also, British people really do get more control over their music. If the UK was like the USA, Adele's second album would have been electronic, not soul. Also artists like Ed Sheeran and Ella Henderson wouldn't have been allowed to do what they wanted with their music either. "Thinking Out Loud" and "Ghost" would not have existed with the creative freedom that those artists were given. On the other hand, Rihanna say's she wants to make "timeless music", then a few days later she releases "Bitch Better Have My Money", which totally follows the trendy sound. Timeless, huh?

Kylie Minogue was only popular in America during the early 2000s, and that was probably only because she was basically the Australian version of Madonna (who's also more popular in Europe since the 90s than in the US).  In the UK, she's been a superstar from the late 80s all the way to present day.  She was lucky to be given the same crossover opportunity that other European dance acts like Real McCoy, Aqua, and Cascada also enjoyed, even though none of them truly infiltrated American culture in general.

Julian Casablancas can't sing, and Vampire Weekend is boring. That leaves only the Black Keys out as  the good band. I didn't say modern American's only listen to EDM, it's just that that's the only thing the radio stations play and that's what the young people listen to.


Your feelings about the Strokes and Vampire Weekend are subjective, I'm only speaking on behalf of what seems to be the case with most hardcore music fans these days, and bands like those, as well as the White Stripes, the Flaming Lips, and many others have garnered a ton of respect from modern music enthusiasts.  Whether or not you enjoy those groups, they still easily fit the category of bands with significant control over their music who aren't as worried about going multi-platinum.

Not being from the UK, I can't speak as directly of what type of music radio stations play there, but if I'm at least to base it off of the British Now That's What I Call Music! series, plus what my online friend from the UK knows about, the UK Singles Chart is easily dominated by pop stars, electronic dance, and techno remixes.  I don't mean to imply the US plays bands like the Black Keys on a regular basis, I just mean to say that the UK hardly plays non-corporatized music on the radio any less than the United States.

EDM started with Disco in the 70s.  Disco never died, it just evolved.  EDM will evolve, but I don't know how much more evolved it can get.  I love it and I hope it never dies.

Music is meant to be enjoyed.  Something you can dance and sing along to, and EDM offers that. 

I disagree.  The current sound began in late 2011 and is distinct from the early late '00s electropop.  Today we are more in the era of Carly Rae Jepsen and Ariana Grande than Lady Gaga and Kesha.  The early stuff was new.  It was exciting.  It was fresh.  It also pushed the boundaries.  Today's EDM-influenced pop is so watered down and boring and plays everything safe.

I totally concur with this.  Artists like Carly Rae Jepsen and Ariana Grande are basically watered-down versions of their more shocking predecessors, in the same way Bush was a safer, less aggressive answer to Nirvana in the 90s.

EDM started with Disco in the 70s.  Disco never died, it just evolved.  EDM will evolve, but I don't know how much more evolved it can get.  I love it and I hope it never dies.

Music is meant to be enjoyed.  Something you can dance and sing along to, and EDM offers that.


I love real EDM, not the stuff currently in Top 40 that isn't very far removed musically from Rebecca Black's "Friday".

disco died because it was time for a change.


"Disco Demolition Night" at Comiskey Park in Chicago was the official end of the Disco Era. 

http://www.robertfeder.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/July-12-1979.png

Pop culture trends and music don't change every 3-5 years. Things don't move that quickly. We don't live in another era after 3 years. Things are always gradual and usually after 8-10 years you would notice a big shift and the obsolescence of previous music and trends.

That's why I predict we won't see electropop and the music we hear today go away completely until around 2018. Then we will here a different sound. Sure music sounds a little different than 2009 today, but there isn't a huge difference between music today and music in 2009 and the sound of 2009 is not very old today.

I really wouldn't be surprised if electropop survived into the 20s because it still shows no sign of fading from significance.  Nothing truly different has begun to grow in influence that has a chance at destroying it altogether.  New acoustic styles have not yet begun to enter the mainstream in refutal of the synthesized trends of the day, as was the case with 90s groups overtaking the synth-happy bands of the 80s.  Even with the disco revival of 2013 that continued into 2015 with Uptown Funk!, EDM itself hasn't lost prominence, and songs like Uptown Funk! and Get Lucky are really just a diversification of the genre like Weezer and Bush were to the Seattle grunge bands.  Some trends just stick around for much longer than others, like post-grunge's 15-year run from 1994 to 2009.

Pop culture trends and music don't change every 3-5 years. Things don't move that quickly. We don't live in another era after 3 years. Things are always gradual and usually after 8-10 years you would notice a big shift and the obsolescence of previous music and trends.

That's why I predict we won't see electropop and the music we hear today go away completely until around 2018. Then we will here a different sound. Sure music sounds a little different than 2009 today, but there isn't a huge difference between music today and music in 2009 and the sound of 2009 is not very old today.


These clashing views is probably because of our different countries of origin. You are Canadian. I am American. Although on the surface we may be similar, we are very different once you dig deeper into each country. Canada was founded on different principles from the United States. Listening to stories from people who have lived in both countries, Canadians live much slower paced lives, yes? I hear mail takes two weeks to arrive. That's freaking long! Here in the U.S. shipping takes about 3-5 days on average. We Americans are also so impatient that 96% of us will purposely consume hot beverages and food that will burn our mouths. I am guilty of this.

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/ninety-six-percent-of-americans-are-so-impatient-they-knowingly-consume-hot-food-or-beverages-that-burn-their-mouths-finds-fifth-third-bank-survey-300026261.html

Now, how does this relate to popular culture? Well, it means that Americans typically get bored easily and are frequently ready to move on to the next thing. Throughout the mid-late 20th century, and even in the first decade of the 21st, popular culture changed a lot. 1962 was very different from 1965. 1973 was very different from 1975. 1981 was very different from 1984. 1993 was very different from 1996. 2002 was very different from 2006. This is regarding American popular culture.

While Canadians mostly care about rock and country, Americans generally have very diverse tastes. It seems since the mid-late 2000's we've been stuck in a rut and everything that is cool right now is just more evolved versions of what was cool in the 2006-2009 timeframe. We haven't had anything totally new since. I don't know about Canada, but here in America things used to change way more often. In the '90s, it seems like things changed so much that every year was practically it's own era.

In conclusion, while Canadians are probably less willing to embrace the unfamiliar, Americans have always been mesmerised by the new and exotic. On American radio, we typically stop playing songs on contemporary Top 40 stations once they are five years old. I'm guessing it's 10 in Canada? I am just making evaluations on what happens in my home country. I'm not saying you're wrong, but I am saying our experiences will result in very different views.

I really wouldn't be surprised if electropop survived into the 20s because it still shows no sign of fading from significance.  Nothing truly different has begun to grow in influence that has a chance at destroying it altogether.


That's exactly why we need an anti-electronic music movement. Synthesizers are getting old!

Music is meant to be enjoyed.  Something you can dance and sing along to, and EDM offers that.


Popular music has existed since the 1920's. Music itself has been around for thousands of years. Music is an art form. It should be taken seriously, as very few people have the gift to make it.

Try this in Europe :0

I noticed in the train a conversation between two teen guys.
They talked about "house", "deep house", "future house", whatever EDM (though all different than in America),
and no single word about rock music as if they never heard of it. I think I'm getting old :o

"Disco Demolition Night" at Comiskey Park in Chicago was the official end of the Disco Era. 

http://www.robertfeder.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/July-12-1979.png


What a night to remember.  :o

That's exactly why we need an anti-electronic music movement. Synthesizers are getting old!


I like synthesized music.

disco died because it was time for a change.


Just like how it's time for EDM and synthesized music to die – It's time for a change.


Try this in Europe :0

I noticed in the train a conversation between two teen guys.
They talked about "house", "deep house", "future house", whatever EDM (though all different than in America),
and no single word about rock music as if they never heard of it. I think I'm getting old :o


House and deep house are definitely popular in America. House was actually very popular throughout most of the 1990s (think 1991-1998), while deep house is a much more recent trend (think in the past 3-4 years). If I were to hear a conversation like that here in America, the guys would have been in their early 20's. It's strange that you feel "out of the loop" regarding the realms of current popular music. Perhaps things are different in the Netherlands? I wouldn't be surprised if things like music marketing and target audiences have dissimilar priorities in relation to the US.

It is different because of the different population make up; but Top 40 still contains at least 15 EDM songs; is that a lot?
Everything seems to be centered at festivals nowadays.

It is different because of the different population make up; but Top 40 still contains at least 15 EDM songs; is that a lot?
Everything seems to be centered at festivals nowadays.


As somebody who actually likes EDM, it is an insult to the genre to call 99% of the stuff that comes on Top 40 radio "EDM."  Ariana Grande is every bit as EDM as Aaron Carter was hip-hop.

As somebody who actually likes EDM, it is an insult to the genre to call 99% of the stuff that comes on Top 40 radio "EDM."  Ariana Grande is every bit as EDM as Aaron Carter was hip-hop.


*Dutch Top 40. Mostly dj stuff.
Ariana Grande is some kind of pop indeed.

It is different because of the different population make up; but Top 40 still contains at least 15 EDM songs; is that a lot?
Everything seems to be centered at festivals nowadays.


15 out of 40 of the Dutch Top 40 positions on the chart is 37.5% of the Top 40. That's quite a bit, yes. But what about electronic music in the Dutch Top 40 in general (any song with a synthesizer)?

Here in America, only 11 songs classify as "EDM" on the Top 40 of the Billboard Hot 100. That's 27.5%, which is somewhat a lot. However, 31 songs in the Top 40 classify as electronic, because they have the use of a synthesizer in them. That's 77.5% of that portion of the chart WTF?! That's way too many! Electronic music should take up no more than 5-10% of the Top 40 at the most.

Yes, there is more to music than Top 40, but popular music is very influential in a person's life. This is why it is worrying when one sound takes up most of the mainstream attention - it narrows their musical tastes.

15 out of 40 of the Dutch Top 40 positions on the chart is 37.5% of the Top 40. That's quite a bit, yes. But what about electronic music in the Dutch Top 40 in general (any song with a synthesizer)?

Here in America, only 11 songs classify as "EDM" on the Top 40 of the Billboard Hot 100. That's 27.5%, which is somewhat a lot. However, 31 songs in the Top 40 classify as electronic, because they have the use of a synthesizer in them. That's 77.5% of that portion of the chart WTF?! That's way too many! Electronic music should take up no more than 5-10% of the Top 40 at the most.

Yes, there is more to music than Top 40, but popular music is very influential in a person's life. This is why it is worrying when one sound takes up most of the mainstream attention - it narrows their musical tastes.


23 electronic songs in top 40? I don't know exactly, that's including the dance pop J Derulo, Years&Years, and such things. I'm excluding hip hop though, which also has electronic things to it.

The main problem to me is, not the overuse of electronic sounds, but the blandness in music. It is all so sleek, overproduced, overdone. Money rules, and no one wants to take the risk to do something interesting, because then there's the risk to lose money (-most people are bland anyway).

In general, I want more indie songs. After coming back in 2012, I thought indie would become large, but besides some other singer-songwriters, this did not happen.

The main problem to me is, not the overuse of electronic sounds, but the blandness in music. It is all so sleek, overproduced, overdone. Money rules, and no one wants to take the risk to do something interesting, because then there's the risk to lose money (-most people are bland anyway).


I agree.  The problem (and ironic thing) about today's music is that its the total opposite of what pioneered the current sound.  Lady Gaga and Ke$ha changed music because they took risks and pushed the envelope.  Can you say the same about Ariana Grande and Taylor Swift?

I agree.  The problem (and ironic thing) about today's music is that its the total opposite of what pioneered the current sound.  Lady Gaga and Ke$ha changed music because they took risks and pushed the envelope.  Can you say the same about Ariana Grande and Taylor Swift?


I actually think Taylor Swift is really talented. At least by today's standards.

I agree.  The problem (and ironic thing) about today's music is that its the total opposite of what pioneered the current sound.  Lady Gaga and Ke$ha changed music because they took risks and pushed the envelope.  Can you say the same about Ariana Grande and Taylor Swift?


You can say the same with Miley Cyrus too.

Lady Gaga and Ke$ha changed music because they took risks and pushed the envelope.


The impact of Lady Gaga is hugely exaggerated. She was very popular in 2009-2011, with her peak being 2010, but she fell off the radar after "Marry the Night" was released. Born This Way was a really disappointing album and single. Her antics got to be too much. She kept wearing these ridiculous outfits that in hindsight make her look totally pretentious and attention-seeking. She released another weird and disappointing album Artpop in 2013 with a boring lead single "Applause". "Do What U Want" was definitely better, I actually liked that song, but she was rapidly losing her touch. By 2014, she was no longer relevant. The jazz album is proof of that. While a pretty good record, if she had done that with Tony back in 2010 or 2011, she would have had a few hit singles off of that album from her name alone. Even if her fans didn't like that music.

Regarding Kesha, she received a lot of criticism back in her heyday during the very early 2010s (2010 and 2011). I distinctly remember people saying that she was untalented. Remember all of the Auto-Tune that she used in her songs? It was ridiculous. I didn't like anything from her second album (which I never bought, ditto with the singles), and she rapidly disappeared from relevance too.

In the early 2010s I remember people saying that Lady Gaga and Ke$ha were overrated, and that they wouldn't be around anymore after a few years. They were right about both. Now that my tastes have expanded, I see the stuff that I used to like as juvenile. Both of them were just fads that lasted about three years total and are now struggling to find footing with current audiences.

The impact of Lady Gaga is hugely exaggerated. She was very popular in 2009-2011, with her peak being 2010, but she fell off the radar after "Marry the Night" was released. Born This Way was a really disappointing album and single. Her antics got to be too much. She kept wearing these ridiculous outfits that in hindsight make her look totally pretentious and attention-seeking. She released another weird and disappointing album Artpop in 2013 with a boring lead single "Applause". "Do What U Want" was definitely better, I actually liked that song, but she was rapidly losing her touch. By 2014, she was no longer relevant. The jazz album is proof of that. While a pretty good record, if she had done that with Tony back in 2010 or 2011, she would have had a few hit singles off of that album from her name alone. Even if her fans didn't like that music.

Just because Lady Gaga's fame (no pun intended) lasted only a few years doesn't mean she wasn't influential to popular music.  That's the same as saying the impact of Jimi Hendrix and Nirvana was exaggerated because they were only around for three years.

The reason Lady Gaga is considered so influential is because in addition to recording hits songs that were wackier and more colorful than the sterilely materialistic hip pop of the 2000s, she redefined what the mainstream pop star was supposed to be in America.  Pop divas were no longer successful solely based on sex appeal and urban influence, but instead a sort of creative rebellion, reflecting perfectly the changing social environment thanks to social media.  Artists like Katy Perry, Ke$ha, Miley Cyrus, Jessie J, etc. fit this mold perfectly, even after Lady Gaga began falling off the map.

With that said, I think equal credit should also be given to the Black Eyed Peas, who were some of the biggest hitmakers of the 2000s but took a complete u-turn by switching to electropop for The E.N.D., and to massive success, spending a staggering 26 consecutive weeks on top of the Billboard Hot 100 with Boom Boom Pow and I Gotta Feeling, respectively.  If Lady Gaga and Ke$ha pioneered the new wave of pop artists for the 2010s, the Black Eyed Peas refuted the urban trends of the 2000s in favor of taking the way of the future with a more electronic style.  Before you knew it, even artists like Enrique Iglesias, Usher, (the king of male r&b in the late 90s and 2000s), Chris Brown, and Rihanna (the disputed urban queen of the mid-late 2000s, alongside Beyoncé) were recording straight up EDM, making it obvious that stars of the past were forced to adapt to a very different sound in order to stay relevant, in the same way Bon Jovi and Aerosmith abandoned their hair metal approach as the grunge revolution dawned in the early 90s.

Regarding Kesha, she received a lot of criticism back in her heyday during the very early 2010s (2010 and 2011). I distinctly remember people saying that she was untalented. Remember all of the Auto-Tune that she used in her songs? It was ridiculous. I didn't like anything from her second album (which I never bought, ditto with the singles), and she rapidly disappeared from relevance too.

She was still a breath of fresh air after all of those unbearable Dirty South ringtone songs like Crank That and Laffy Taffy.  And while her music definitely has its detractors, you can't deny that it was a least a lot more energetic and playful than the robotic kitsch being released by Ariana Grande and new Taylor Swift.

In the early 2010s I remember people saying that Lady Gaga and Ke$ha were overrated, and that they wouldn't be around anymore after a few years. They were right about both. Now that my tastes have expanded, I see the stuff that I used to like as juvenile. Both of them were just fads that lasted about three years total and are now struggling to find footing with current audiences.


It's too early to tell if Ke$ha is a has-been or not, considering her last album was only released in 2012 and she appeared on the wildly successful Timber with Pitbull not too long ago.  Lady Gaga has certainly lost much of the superstardom she had in 2009-2011, but as I stated earlier, her influence on popular music is still relevant today.

I remember the last time that Ke$ha played Picksburgh.

The Post Gazette ran a story where they interviewed fans who attended the concert.  One of the fans remarked,
"I thought she'd look skankier"  ;D

I agree that Lady Gaga changed the sound of pop music. She was pretty revolutionary. After her song was released in 2008, all other pop stars followed her sound and everything became electronic right after her.

People are forgetting how HUGE she was back then even though she is unheard of now. While her fame was short lived, she was the most pop singer since Britney Spears at the time.

The impact of Lady Gaga is hugely exaggerated. She was very popular in 2009-2011, with her peak being 2010, but she fell off the radar after "Marry the Night" was released. Born This Way was a really disappointing album and single. Her antics got to be too much. She kept wearing these ridiculous outfits that in hindsight make her look totally pretentious and attention-seeking. She released another weird and disappointing album Artpop in 2013 with a boring lead single "Applause". "Do What U Want" was definitely better, I actually liked that song, but she was rapidly losing her touch. By 2014, she was no longer relevant. The jazz album is proof of that. While a pretty good record, if she had done that with Tony back in 2010 or 2011, she would have had a few hit singles off of that album from her name alone. Even if her fans didn't like that music.


I both agree and disagree about Lady Gaga's impact being exaggerated.  Personally, I am surprised she fell off the map as quickly as she did considering how big she was in 2009 and 2010.  Maybe she peaked too soon?  I also agree that Born the Way was disappointing and had a very different sound than the Fame and the Fame Monster.  Its understandable she wanted to take it in a different, more serious direction, but I think she would have remained popular for longer had she stuck to the fun, catchy dance tunes she was known for.  Even though the album was widely inferior, Born This Way still had some pretty successful hits.  The Edge of Glory was great and for a while you couldn't go anywhere without hearing "You and I."  I really liked Marry the Night but I don't remember it getting a lot of airplay, at least in the U.S.  Applause wasn't as bad as its made out to be but it was more of a follow up to Born This Way than it was the Fame Monster.

All of that said, despite her short reign as a superstar, she completely revolutionized music.  Before Lady Gaga, electronic dance music was widely a niche genre but she brought it to the masses.  Even though today's superstars like Ariana Grande are much more watered down and "conservative" compared to what Lady Gaga was, I can't say music today would sound like it does had it not been for her influence.

Just because Lady Gaga's fame (no pun intended) lasted only a few years doesn't mean she wasn't influential to popular music.  That's the same as saying the impact of Jimi Hendrix and Nirvana was exaggerated because they were only around for three years. Lady Gaga has certainly lost much of the superstardom she had in 2009-2011, but as I stated earlier, her influence on popular music is still relevant today.



I agree that Lady Gaga changed the sound of pop music. She was pretty revolutionary. After her song was released in 2008, all other pop stars followed her sound and everything became electronic right after her.



All of that said, despite her short reign as a superstar, she completely revolutionized music.  Before Lady Gaga, electronic dance music was widely a niche genre but she brought it to the masses.  Even though today's superstars like Ariana Grande are much more watered down and "conservative" compared to what Lady Gaga was, I can't say music today would sound like it does had it not been for her influence.


In response to all of you, the industry was moving into a more electronic direction in spite of Lady Gaga - not because of her. If anything, it was Timbaland that started this trend. In 2006, Timbaland produced Justin Timberlake's FutureSex/LoveSounds album. It sounded very late 2000's, unlike Nelly Furtado's Loose album. Timbaland produced both of those albums at the same time! Loose sounds kind of early 2000's, while FutureSex/LoveSounds sounds late 2000's. In the same year.

In 2007, Timbaland released his own album "Shock Value". This album featured "The Way I Are" and "Give It to Me".  Both very electropop songs. Britney Spears released "Blackout", a very electropop album. Piece of Me anyone? Christina Aguilera released "Keeps Gettin' Better" in 2008. Her last solo top ten hit.

Lady Gaga wasn't that influential. The industry had been naturally moving in that direction for awhile when she hit it big. She was just in the right place at the right time. That's all.

In response to all of you, the industry was moving into a more electronic direction in spite of Lady Gaga - not because of her. If anything, it was Timbaland that started this trend. In 2006, Timbaland produced Justin Timberlake's FutureSex/LoveSounds album. It sounded very late 2000's, unlike Nelly Furtado's Loose album. Timbaland produced both of those albums at the same time! Loose sounds kind of early 2000's, while FutureSex/LoveSounds sounds late 2000's. In the same year.

In 2007, Timbaland released his own album "Shock Value". This album featured "The Way I Are" and "Give It to Me".  Both very electropop songs. Britney Spears released "Blackout", a very electropop album. Piece of Me anyone? Christina Aguilera released "Keeps Gettin' Better" in 2008. Her last solo top ten hit.

Lady Gaga wasn't that influential. The industry had been naturally moving in that direction for awhile when she hit it big. She was just in the right place at the right time. That's all.

Yes but I don't think electropop would have been as big if it weren't for Lady Gaga. I don't think we would have heard the same amount of electropop songs by other artists in 2009 if Lady Gaga wasn't in the picture. Even if music was already moving in that direction, she pushed it even further into popularity.

Lady Gaga wasn't that influential. The industry had been naturally moving in that direction for awhile when she hit it big. She was just in the right place at the right time. That's all.


Timbaland's "Shock Value" album, in my opinion, is distinctly late 2000s and I would not group it in the same category as the electropop that hit big in 2009.  Britney Spears' Blackout album wasn't hugely popular and I totally don't even remember Christina's album during that era.

I think one album that was hugely influential and is largely forgotten today was Britney Spears' Circus album.  It was far more popular than Blackout and was hugely influential in pushing the electropop sound into the mainstream in 2009, right alongside Lady Gaga, Ke$ha, Katy Perry, and the Black Eyed Peas.

I definitely agree that Lady Gaga was in the right place in the right time.  However, I agree with Slim95 that electropop wouldn't have been near as big as it was without her.  The other popular artists doing the genre were all secondary to Lady Gaga.

Timbaland's "Shock Value" album, in my opinion, is distinctly late 2000s and I would not group it in the same category as the electropop that hit big in 2009.  Britney Spears' Blackout album wasn't hugely popular and I totally don't even remember Christina's album during that era.

Agreed.  Timbaland was popular as far back as 1997, when he released Up Jumps Da Boogie.  His productions for Justin Timberlake, Nelly Furtado, and others were just faster-paced reiterations of the typical percussion-driven sound of the late 90s and beyond.  Nas' You Owe Me, from 1999, has a pretty darn similar beat to something like My Love or Promiscuous.  By the time Timbaland released Shock Value II amidst the electropop craze, his popularity was already beginning to decline.

I think one album that was hugely influential and is largely forgotten today was Britney Spears' Circus album.  It was far more popular than Blackout and was hugely influential in pushing the electropop sound into the mainstream in 2009, right alongside Lady Gaga, Ke$ha, Katy Perry, and the Black Eyed Peas.

Circus isn't really an electropop album, the ratio of emphasis on percussion versus synth is still pretty high.  The Timbaland-esque title track is very 2000s.

I think Akon's Freedom album is a better example of a late 2008 electropop record that nobody gives enough credit to.  As was the case with the Black Eyed Peas, Akon was one of the most prominent superstars of 2000s urban music, and with this album, he was already undertaking a dramatically different path, refuting the trends of the past.  While Freedom was definitely not as successful as The Fame or The E.N.D., it should be given some credit for starting the trend of 2000s r&b superstars transitioning to electropop.

Circus isn't really an electropop album, the ratio of emphasis on percussion versus synth is still pretty high.  The Timbaland-esque title track is very 2000s.

Circus sounds very '00s, but "Radar" and "If You Seek Amy" have that distinct 2009 sound and for me, were two of the more memorable songs of that summer.


I think Akon's Freedom album is a better example of a late 2008 electropop record that nobody gives enough credit to.  As was the case with the Black Eyed Peas, Akon was one of the most prominent superstars of 2000s urban music, and with this album, he was already undertaking a dramatically different path, refuting the trends of the past.  While Freedom was definitely not as successful as The Fame or The E.N.D., it should be given some credit for starting the trend of 2000s r&b superstars transitioning to electropop.


Personally, I think Akon's Freedom album and the hits that came from it, especially "Beautiful" and "Day Dreaming", are one of the stronger ties that 2009 has with the '00s musically.  While it did have a more evolved sound than say 2004 Akon, I would say overall it was still firmly in the '00s camp.  It sounds virtually nothing like '10s music.

Only if it doesn't mean nothing but rap and country!

Circus sounds very '00s, but "Radar" and "If You Seek Amy" have that distinct 2009 sound and for me, were two of the more memorable songs of that summer.

If U Seek Amy is debatably 2010s at most.  The synths aren't particularly trancy as they were in Just Dance or I Gotta Feeling, and the track is still mostly guided by its percussion.  Radar sounds much more 2000s as well, as it retains the decade's typical raunchy melodic style, and its synths are too hollow to be compared to Lady Gaga over Fergie or T-Pain.

Personally, I think Akon's Freedom album and the hits that came from it, especially "Beautiful" and "Day Dreaming", are one of the stronger ties that 2009 has with the '00s musically.  While it did have a more evolved sound than say 2004 Akon, I would say overall it was still firmly in the '00s camp.  It sounds virtually nothing like '10s music.

It has the same feel as, say, Jay Sean's All or Nothing.  Neither album is fully electropop, but both contain songs that travel at a faster, more house-oriented pace than typical 2000s urban. There's a lot of emphasis on synth, and the melodies are much sunnier than the harder-sounding tracks from the previous few years.  Songs like Beautiful fit those descriptions perfectly.  The overt urban influences of Trouble and Konvicted are almost totally absent, even though Akon's persona isn't radically different.  Day Dreaming isn't actually on Freedom, but even so, it, too, sounds too synthesized and melodic to completely fit the 2000s mold.

This thread has a lot of decadology...  :-\\

This thread has a lot of decadology...  :-\\


They're ruining my thread!  >:(

Nikki Minaj's song "The Night is still young" or whatever it's called is an example of how electropop is still alive and well today.

Nikki Minaj's song "The Night is still young" or whatever it's called is an example of how electropop is still alive and well today.


Exactly. Which is why it needs to go away.

Nikki Minaj's song "The Night is still young" or whatever it's called is an example of how electropop is still alive and well today.


That is one of the better songs on the radio right now in my opinion.

They're ruining my thread!  >:(

hahaha!!! ;D

If anything, I've felt that EDM and Dance-Pop has been losing ground this year.  It makes up a smaller percentage of the Top 40 than it did a year or two ago.  It's just that no new big trend has risen up to replace it yet.  The genre is clearly past peak though.

If anything, I've felt that EDM and Dance-Pop has been losing ground this year.  It makes up a smaller percentage of the Top 40 than it did a year or two ago.  It's just that no new big trend has risen up to replace it yet.  The genre is clearly past peak though.


I think there was a significant hip-hop resurgence during the first half of this year.  Not that hip-hop ever died but its more prominent in Top 40 this year than its been in any year since 2009 in my opinion.

I think there was a significant hip-hop resurgence during the first half of this year.  Not that hip-hop ever died but its more prominent in Top 40 this year than its been in any year since 2009 in my opinion.

That trap junk you hear isn't real Hip-Hop. Real Hip-Hop went underground a long time ago and remains there now.

The impact of Lady Gaga is hugely exaggerated. She was very popular in 2009-2011, with her peak being 2010, but she fell off the radar after "Marry the Night" was released. Born This Way was a really disappointing album and single. Her antics got to be too much. She kept wearing these ridiculous outfits that in hindsight make her look totally pretentious and attention-seeking. She released another weird and disappointing album Artpop in 2013 with a boring lead single "Applause". "Do What U Want" was definitely better, I actually liked that song, but she was rapidly losing her touch. By 2014, she was no longer relevant. The jazz album is proof of that. While a pretty good record, if she had done that with Tony back in 2010 or 2011, she would have had a few hit singles off of that album from her name alone. Even if her fans didn't like that music.

Regarding Kesha, she received a lot of criticism back in her heyday during the very early 2010s (2010 and 2011). I distinctly remember people saying that she was untalented. Remember all of the Auto-Tune that she used in her songs? It was ridiculous. I didn't like anything from her second album (which I never bought, ditto with the singles), and she rapidly disappeared from relevance too.

In the early 2010s I remember people saying that Lady Gaga and Ke$ha were overrated, and that they wouldn't be around anymore after a few years. They were right about both. Now that my tastes have expanded, I see the stuff that I used to like as juvenile. Both of them were just fads that lasted about three years total and are now struggling to find footing with current audiences.
I don't think Kesha was that talented and that basically she rode the "Electro-pop" wave.

Agreed.  Timbaland was popular as far back as 1997, when he released Up Jumps Da Boogie.  His productions for Justin Timberlake, Nelly Furtado, and others were just faster-paced reiterations of the typical percussion-driven sound of the late 90s and beyond.  Nas' You Owe Me, from 1999, has a pretty darn similar beat to something like My Love or Promiscuous.  By the time Timbaland released Shock Value II amidst the electropop craze, his popularity was already beginning to decline.

Circus isn't really an electropop album, the ratio of emphasis on percussion versus synth is still pretty high.  The Timbaland-esque title track is very 2000s.

I think Akon's Freedom album is a better example of a late 2008 electropop record that nobody gives enough credit to.  As was the case with the Black Eyed Peas, Akon was one of the most prominent superstars of 2000s urban music, and with this album, he was already undertaking a dramatically different path, refuting the trends of the past.  While Freedom was definitely not as successful as The Fame or The E.N.D., it should be given some credit for starting the trend of 2000s r&b superstars transitioning to electropop.
Timbaland produced half of R&B singers Aaliyah's 2nd album "One In A Million" from 1996 and produced 3 of 4 Aaliyah's radio hits from that album.

Timbaland basically reinvented himself as a producer going from Hip-Hop to Electro-pop with Nelly Furtado's 2006 "Loose" album. I do think "Loose" is one of the most innovative records of the past 10 years and maybe of all time in mainstream music. What was on the radio in early 2006? Ringtone Rap? You turned on the radio at that time and like wow that sounds different from what I usually hear.

Yes true Gays weren't accepted in the disco era but they weren't very accepted as recently as the 1990's either.


Since you actually lived the '90s, I'm not doubting you. It wasn't until about the last four years of the 2000's that homosexuals really started to become accepted by society. Interestingly enough, here's a little something from Wikipedia:

Brando made the following comment about his sex life in an interview with Gary Carey, for his 1976 biography The Only Contender, "Homosexuality is so much in fashion it no longer makes news. Like a large number of men, I, too, have had homosexual experiences and I am not ashamed. I have never paid much attention to what people think about me. But if there is someone who is convinced that Jack Nicholson and I are lovers, may they continue to do so. I find it amusing."

Interesting...


Well Italian-Americans were very into the disco era too I think.

So wait it doesn't matter what genre or musical trend it is you want synthesizers to be done with? Ok.


Yes, it's very much true that Italian-Americans were into the disco trend. I should have mentioned that earlier. Thanks for correcting me.

Yes. I straight up want synthesizers to go away completely.

That trap junk you hear isn't real Hip-Hop. Real Hip-Hop went underground a long time ago and remains there now.


J. Cole went underground with 2014 Forest Hills Drive. The album has received very little or practically zero promotion by his request. Perhaps to make it more credible?

At the very beginning of the year, this underground rapper named Joey Bada$$ released B4.Da.$$. It has some really great songs, such as "On & On", which has an old school '90s vibe.

I don't think Kesha was that talented and that basically she rode the "Electro-pop" wave.


This I can agree with.  I believe Gaga was a pioneer but Kesha basically rode the wave.

Timbaland produced half of R&B singers Aaliyah's 2nd album "One In A Million" from 1996 and produced 3 of 4 Aaliyah's radio hits from that album.

That album was still pretty primitive in its production and sounds distinctly mid-90s.  I just think Timbaland as he was known for most of the 2000s was born with the Welcome to Our World album, which was truly ahead of its time and contained songs that sound far more like they were produced in the early 2000s or even slightly later, and definitely not during the heart of the 90s.  Not to mention, Welcome to Our World was the first time the man stepped in front of the mic and rap with other emcees, as opposed to just produce mostly slow jams for Aaliyah.

Timbaland basically reinvented himself as a producer going from Hip-Hop to Electro-pop with Nelly Furtado's 2006 "Loose" album. I do think "Loose" is one of the most innovative records of the past 10 years and maybe of all time in mainstream music. What was on the radio in early 2006? Ringtone Rap? You turned on the radio at that time and like wow that sounds different from what I usually hear.

I'll agree that Loose marked a certain shift in the typical Timbaland's style (though it didn't kill ringtone rap), as his tracks mostly increased in bpm, but it certainly wasn't the same as the EDM that dominated 2009 like Lady Gaga's The Fame and the Black Eyed Peas' The E.N.D.  Again, too, Timbaland productions with a dance tempo weren't absent in the past, even if they weren't as common.  Just listen to this song from 1999:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d9zJat43Kao