Why does everyone think it's "cool" to hate Skrillex?

[Thrashy 2,800]

As far as Prog Metal goes; being a fan of the genre myself, I highly appreciate it and the skill required to perform it. But comparing that genre to, say, Futurpop, is, as you put it yourself, apples and oranges.  I enjoy both genres, but I appreciate them for entirely different reasons.

As a huge Metal fan, I also really enjoy bands who blend Metal genres with Electronic music. (

 link because I don't want to spam you with videos).

I really kind of dig the Neurotech one, reminds me quite a bit of some of Fear Factory's more synth-driven songs. If that's a good representation of how a lot of their stuff is, I think I'll give them a closer look.

[Soundgarden 2,758]

I know that people may chose to dislike something because everyone else likes it. Skrillex is more of a subcategory of dubstep producer. But he still makes good music. I've seen tons of people hate on many types of dubstep. No one seems to have the exact qualities of the dubstep they like down. That is because it is so easy to make dubstep. It is easy to combine certain types of dubstep and electronic music to create new music. Nobody thinks its cool to hate on skrillex because they don't. Every body just can't pick what kind of music created to like. Skrillex has a rougher more slicey kind of technique. But smooth in between. Plus saying that you hate skrillexes music but like dubstep is like saying that you hate bread but love pancakes. It doesn't work.

 

Hope this is helpful, and I know I'm going to get an assfull of replies sayin that I'm wrong. But I know what I'm talking about.

- rave

 

I don't quite understand this statement, are you saying that we can't like Dubstep if we don't like Skrillex's music? So, Dubstep fans like me are bound to like every single artist within this specific genre, otherwise we aren't Dubstep fans at all? 

 

Skrillex's music and Dubstep are two very different things, so saying that you have to like Skrillex in order to like Dubstep, is like saying you have to love Grindcore in order to like Metalcore. I might have misunderstood your statement, though and if so, sorry.

 

I really kind of dig the Neurotech one, reminds me quite a bit of some of Fear Factory's more synth-driven songs. If that's a good representation of how a lot of their stuff is, I think I'll give them a closer look.

 

I'm continuing the displaying of electronic artists who make use of "human elements", even though you probably understand the point now, here's an example of how making use of DJ equipment doesn't have to be all about changing decks, pitching and scratching but instead being utilized to create beautiful tracks.

 

This is Post-Dubstep btw

[Vinyl Rave 67]

I don't quite understand this statement, are you saying that we can't like Dubstep if we don't like Skrillex's music? So, Dubstep fans like me are bound to like every single artist within this specific genre, otherwise we aren't Dubstep fans at all? 

 

Skrillex's music and Dubstep are two very different things, so saying that you have to like Skrillex in order to like Dubstep, is like saying you have to love Grindcore in order to like Metalcore. I might have misunderstood your statement, though and if so, sorry.

 

 

 

I'm continuing the displaying of electronic artists who make use of "human elements", even though you probably understand the point now, here's an example of how making use of DJ equipment doesn't have to be all about changing decks, pitching and scratching but instead being utilized to create beautiful tracks.

 

This is Post-Dubstep btw

No I'm saying they like dubstep but hate skrillexs music.

Skrillex makes a sub catigory of dubstep that is choppier and more rough.

That's why every one hates skrillex. He does his own thing that no other person does.

But skrillex is also one of the leading producers of dubstep. He is one of the icons of dubstep.

If you know what dubstep is you have probably heard of skrillex.

 

I just like him because I thing he makes good music. You can like what ever you want to like.

-Rave

[Milk Wave 454]

No I'm saying they like dubstep but hate skrillexs music.

Skrillex makes a sub catigory of dubstep that is choppier and more rough.

That's why every one hates skrillex. He does his own thing that no other person does.

But skrillex is also one of the leading producers of dubstep. He is one of the icons of dubstep.

If you know what dubstep is you have probably heard of skrillex.

 

I just like him because I thing he makes good music. You can like what ever you want to like.

-Rave

Some people choose different songs to like and dislike. Like how I like iNexus but I downright hate Datsik, doesn't really change much. If someone hates Skrillex but likes dubstep from others then that's quite a common thing to see. Its not like its bad or anything, since after all almost everyone calls his music 'brostep'.

I mean, I love dubstep but most of his songs are either ok or bad to me. Very few are actually good that he's ever made to me, and none of them are dubstep at all.

Everyone hates Sonny for their reasons. Some because since he does different sounds, but mostly because he went mainstream.

 

And also,

I would disagree that he's the leading producer of dubstep, since like I said before everyone calls his music 'brostep'. Now he did INSPIRE lots of other people to start making the newer dubstep of today, but no he's not that.

[Moog the Kvlt 1,460]

No I'm saying they like dubstep but hate skrillexs music.

Skrillex makes a sub catigory of dubstep that is choppier and more rough.

That's why every one hates skrillex. He does his own thing that no other person does.

But skrillex is also one of the leading producers of dubstep. He is one of the icons of dubstep.

If you know what dubstep is you have probably heard of skrillex.

 

I don't think that being trashed by electronic music fans, musical critics, and dubstep lovers really makes him an icon. If this were true then Nickelback would be the modern AC/DC and One Direction would be the new Beatles. Also on the whole "no other person does" thing, there are quite a few people who prefer to imitate his sound.

 

 

 

This is Post-Dubstep btw

 

God damnit Soundgarden, you always are finding good Dubstep.

 

 

 

 

My initial reaction was a snicker at the beginning vox, but the moment he started scat singing...that's what totally won me over.

 

So yeah, I guess it really was just run-of-the-mill ignorance that caused me to make the unfounded assumption that everyone takes the DJ route live. But seeing that the "human element" is alive and well has really rejuvenated my outlook on heavily-synthed music...totally not what I used to picture whenever I would hear such music.

 

Nice to see you coming around it's good to know that you've been willing to open your mind up, and since everyone else is still doing it, might as well leave some more examples.

 

 

And why not leave a more recognized and well known example

[Freewave 1,145]

Of course this biggest mistake we can do is picka lot of tracks showing how close electronic music can be made like rock. What we should do is also the show you the other side of the fence.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fvc-zfK8G38

 

 

 

"This time, fully E’d up, I finally grasped viscerally why the music was made the way it was; how certain tingly textures goosepimpled your skin and particular oscillator riffs triggered the E-rush; the way the gaseous diva vocals mirrored your own gushing emotions. Finally, I understood ecstasy as a sonic science. And it became even clearer that the audience was the star: that guy over there doing fishy-finger dancing was as much a part of the entertainment-the tableau-as were the DJs or bands. Dance moves spread through the crowd like superfast viruses. I was instantly entrained in a new kind of dancing-tics and spasms, twitches and jerks, the agitation of bodies broken down into separate components. Unity and self-expression fused in a force field of pulsating, undulating euphoria."~Simon Reynolds

[Moog the Kvlt 1,460]

Of course this biggest mistake we can do is picka lot of tracks showing how close electronic music can be made like rock. What we should do is also the show you the other side of the fence.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fvc-zfK8G38

 

 

Funny that you'd bring up Underworld and The Chemical Brothers, considering that I was thinking about posting them, and how Underworld are an all time favorite of mine.

 

And hey I posted both a bunch of non-rock/metal influenced electronic bands.

Edited May 11, 2013 by gooM

[Freewave 1,145]

i read your mind!!!

 

Was it you who posted Underworld and Crystal Method in that unrelated thread awhile back ? I though NOW is the time we should get Underworld in a live electronic music thread   I must have read your mind (although i love both of those bands). Crystal Method and Chemcial Brothers put on a great live show.

 

Was not trying to say you weren't putting some cool videos, just wanted it to be a little less noodly and maybe some more hands in the air.  Idioteque for the win tho.

 

One thing we can point out to anyone is if you like electronic and you like rock music, industrial rock and metal is a natural fit too. I've seen Frontline Assembly, KMFDM, NIN, and Rammstein live and all were great too.

Edited May 11, 2013 by Freewave

[Rorschach1 1]

In this pony's personal opinion, listenin to Skrill-excrement is much akin to watching spongebob. in either case, if your not careful, you will lose what braincells you have and never get them back. His "music" shouldn't even be called music, as the term music applies to songs that have a meaning, a melody, a deepness to them. none of the things i just listed apply to Skrillex. but its ok, a couple more months and people will forget about him.

[Nilkad_Naqadah 144]

You have a point there, you can't compare Skrillex's music with something completely different, but why do people still call his music Dubstep then? Also, neither Knife Party or Deadmau5 plays either Dubstep or Brostep, mostly Electrohouse (Although Knife Party does have some Brostep songs)

 

Because it is dubstep. It's a very different style of dubstep, but it's still part of the same genre. Again, it's like how Foo Fighters, AC/DC, and the Red Hot Chili Peppers are all completely different styles and not really comparable, but they're still all rock.

 

In this pony's personal opinion, listenin to Skrill-excrement is much akin to watching spongebob. in either case, if your not careful, you will lose what braincells you have and never get them back. His "music" shouldn't even be called music, as the term music applies to songs that have a meaning, a melody, a deepness to them. none of the things i just listed apply to Skrillex. but its ok, a couple more months and people will forget about him.

That is a misinformed statement. Music is defined as a medium of art which expresses emotion through sound, specifically through the interactions of seperate sounds, (paraphrased) which is exactly what Skrillex's songs do. For example, Scary Monsters and Nice Sprites uses a melodic and peaceful sounding tune to contrast with the raw, aggressive, chaotic rhythm to be found after the drop, and alternates between the two. It results in two seperate, powerful emotions conveyed, without having to resort to lyrics to convey them. Admittedly Skrillex is not as good at conveying emotion as, say, Knife Party, and a lot of his songs are conveying similar things, but you really can't claim that his songs aren't conveying anything, or that they're not music.

 

I don't like Skrillex, either. Not because I'm jumping on a mindless hate bandwagon, but because dubstep (or whatever subgenre of electronica he's actually a part of, according to some o' you purists) is nothing more than a musical joke to me.

 

Let me explain. Make no mistake that I DO understand why people like it, and this is not to be taken as a criticism of the musical tastes of those who do enjoy it.

 

But the elitist in me cannot respect electronica artists as actual "musicians" since almost nothing they make contains actual recordings, only prerendered samples and beat loops that are arranged and manipulated with the click of a mouse. I'm sorry, but any way you look at it, even the most trite of poppy soft rock bands have more talent in them than most electronica composers, if for no other reason than the fact that they actually record live acoustics (let alone have the skill to learn how to play an instrument or sing in the first place).

 

I'm not saying they don't have to go through a grueling mixing and mastering process of their own; that does take some skill, at least...assuming they don't just have a producer do all that for them. But the fact that every beat, every pitch, everything is so perfect and devoid of any human error...well, it removes the distinctly human aspect of the music almost entirely.

 

And the fact that people like Skrillex go on "tours" is another total joke. What, so he can sit behind a DJ station and occasionally throw a hand gesture of minimal acknowledgement to a fan? Motherbucker, REAL performers talk to their audiences, toss 'em beers, get them pumped up, high-five fans, throw picks and drumsticks and miscellaneous merch out into the crowd.

 

So, you asked why people hate Skrillex, and got a rant from a hater of all dubstep/brostep/whatever music. But what can ya do but enjoy what you enjoy, right? Isn't the bottom line - the 'low line' if you will - that at the end of the day, who really cares if someone hates what you love? All that matters is you like it. Hell, the fact that we're all on a brony forum means that's a message we can all agree with...

I feel this needs a response, as it's a pretty well-put-together post from someone who clearly knows what they're talking about, and whom I must say I disagree with.

 

While it is true that electronica musicians don't need to actually learn to play instruments (although a lot of the rookie electro artists I personally know started making electro after already having learned instruments) that doesn't mean there isn't any talent involved. You somewhat addressed that when you mentioned the "grueling mixing and mastering process" (a good way to describe it) there's the simple fact that even coming up with rhythms that sound good requires a colossal amount of talent, let alone multiple rhythms that all have to interact in a way that works and doesn't sound awful. I myself have tried to make songs, and have failed miserably. I've been working on one for the past couple months and am nowhere near anything decent. 

 

Beyond that, there's the fact that a lot of time electro artists use the fact that they don't need to actually play the songs to leap past what other genres are able to do. The (in my opinion) best artists create rhythms that are so complex, nuanced, or just plain fast and ridiculous that it's not even physically possible for a single person or in some cases a group of people to play them on instruments. This means that they're dealing with things that no other genre had to deal with, because there was no way to make such things even applicable. It requires a colossal amount of skill, and it's a skill that can't be taught the way one can teach guitar or drums. Now, don't misunderstand me. I love rock, jazz, and certain other genres played on actual instruments. There are amazing songs in those genres, and there are amazingly talented individuals who are performing in them or have in the past. But, as a listener who sees myself as a connosieur of music in general, I frankly can't not appreciate what has been done by electro artists.

 

On the subject of the lack of imperfections, there are musicians whose music sounds somewhat stiff and off because of this, but a great many artists have enough variety within each song that this doesn't become an issue for me. 

 

Lastly, I have to agree that a lot of electro musicians' idea of a tour is stilted and awful. That's one thing that's always somewhat bothered me about the genre. Not every artist has that problem, but the majority do, and I really feel something needs to be done about that.

 

 

God, I really need to just stop reading through this thread. This post is getting a bit ridiculous. It's just, I see certain replies, and I feel compelled to respond.

Edited May 13, 2013 by Nilkad_Naquada

[mR.dErP893 39]

At first I didn't like skrillex because I only saw pictures of him with a computer and saying he was a fake musician. Then my friend gave me 2 skrillex cds so I sat down and listened to them and now I like skrillex. I laughed when I saw him in Wreck it Ralph.

[Nilkad_Naqadah 144]

What you're saying in that statement is that definitively good or definitively bad music doesn't exist. In the context of what I was originally correcting Lowline on (application of talent), your statement implies that talent is subjective as well. That simply isn't true. If it were, music theory wouldn't even be a thing, nor production standards. The perfect fifth, well-rounded soundscapes, time signatures, key, dynamic compression, stereo implementation... the list goes on almost forever, but what you're saying is that it's impossible to implement any of those aspects properly in music, while also claiming that all music is guaranteed to implement all of those aspects properly in music.

 

Music being entirely subjective is just something passive listeners or bad musicians unwilling to grow say. There are definitely objective factors that go into music, especially in recorded music, and those are what I was talking about. When you're an active listener, especially one that's experienced in its creation to the extent that someone like me is, the objective aspects of music become more obvious, and you fully understand that most aspects of music can be rationally defined objectively. There is an overlap in terms of personal taste, sure, but the objectivity remains.

 

And this isn't just true with music; it's true with all art. A crayon drawing and a rendition by a trained artist of an image based on the same subject matter are going to have objective, identifiable differences in quality and the talent it took to create each piece. A story lacking in proper grammar and many of the aspects that define good creative writing will be objectively worse than the same story told by a writer who's more well-versed and educated in creative writing and has a firm grasp on proper grammar. Music is the same way; it all depends on the artist and his ability to compose and produce, with no genre requiring more actual talent than another.

 

Like I said, if Lowline had stuck to "I don't like it", that would have constituted an opinion. That would have been the end of it. But he didn't stop there, and instead attempted to make a claim that the ability to play live instruments takes more talent that electronica composition because he holds a narrow-minded (albeit common, at least among passive listeners) definition of what can and can't constitute talent. In his mind, he has redefined talent to a definition that differs from reality's. Also not uncommon; in fact, most listeners do this, because the vast majority of listeners are passive listeners. But it doesn't make it correct, and if he ever intends to go anywhere in music production, he'll re-teach himself about these things so that he's not incorrect in the future while he's working on his music.

 

Look, it's cool that you're so attached to the tight scope of music that you enjoy, but by no means is anything that falls outside of that actually inferior. I don't like blues, I actually really dislike it, but you're not about to see me jumping into blues threads calling it "nothing more than a musical joke" simply because it lacks some particular aspect of it that defines the kind of music I enjoy to the point where it ends up redefining "talent" in my mind. If I came in here and said blues is bad simply because it lacks a systematic, structured, non-improvisational foundation and is missing a distinct element of high energy, and also proceeded to claim that because of their ability to maintain their ability to play an instrument while simultaneously going absolutely nuts on-stage means that metal guitarists have more talent than most blues artists, I would be wrong.

 

Actually, on that note, I actually dislike electronica quite a bit as well, at least most contemporary versions of it. Try reading that sentence, and put it into perspective in terms of how it would relate to the other posts I've made in this thread regarding how much talent it requires to make. The ability to separate personal taste from objective analysis is the #1 factor that makes a good judge of music.

 

As it pertains to this thread, the inability to separate subjectivity from objectivity in music that I just spent a few posts describing contributes probably the most to the rampant Skrillex hate.

 

TL;DR: Skrillex is good, dubstep as a genre is good and like all genres its effectiveness as music depends entirely on the abilities of the musician, and if you don't get that, you lack the ability to separate what makes music objectively good from your own individual subjective tastes.

Marry me. That speech was amazing. Never have I read a more masterfully objective treatise with the exception of the works of Rand herself.

 

Personally I haven't studied music theory in any way, but I try to avoid letting that stop me from objectively viewing songs. 

 

I sincerely hope I'm not translating this incorrectly, but it seems to me that what you're saying is that I need to state, in plain text, that every opinion I state is...well, an opinion? Because if everyone who ever expressed an opinion on these forums needed to put a disclaimer in their posts, e.g. "The following statements are the poster's own opinion and are not to be taken as a presentment of fact," then I know a LOT of posts that need to be edited...and that's not just counting this thread.

 

And as for subjectivity vs. objectivity, I do not think these words mean what you think they mean, sir. In fact - not opinion - you seem to have the definitions totally reversed, if I am correctly interpreting your posts:

 

Subjectivity dictates a biased, necessarily opinionated look at something based on personal suppositions and anecdotal evidence, thus making my thoughts on the matter purely subjective. And although you are free to argue against my claims (I don't necessarily disagree with your arguments, by the way), I'll not necessarily heed them as fact either, unless you can present valid evidence to debunk them.

 

Objectivity, on the other hand, calls for a purely logical, scientific approach to a topic based on empirical observation. Although you are free to take a calculated, scientific approach as to why you think people do/should/shouldn't hate Skrillex (or, in my case, electronica in general), that's not what exactly what I was going for, in case I may have said something in my post to make you think otherwise. Was it the conviction in my tone? I may have conviction in my belief that electronica takes less time and effort to produce than traditional music - a view that I freely admit is unfounded - but that does not necessarily mean that I hold it as completely infallible. Post a video detailing the process of producing an electronica song, and you might just sway me.

Actually, I think you're misunderstanding. What he's saying is that disliking electro is subjective, and cannot be considered incorrect. However, you chose to also tell the basis for that opinion, and the basis was objective and incorrect.This is something that seems to happen a lot on the internet. I've seen many cases where a person tries to claim that the entirety of their statement is subjective, including the facts that they base their opinion on, and that is simply not true. If you simply state your opinion, nobody can claim that it is invalid or incorrect, but when you tell about what facts you base it on, it's completely reasonable for a person to say that those facts are flawed or incorrect, if that is the case.

Edited May 13, 2013 by Nilkad_Naquada

[Nightraxx 130]

Well, it's the classical, old Story of Popularity.

 

Popularity comes in two shapes : The one where people like and support you and your work; And the one, where people get highly critical of you and you work.

 

Pretty much everything nowadays that has millions of fans and a lot of media/internet coverage, also tend to draw attention from nay-sayers, haters and trolls alike.

 

Just look at Star Wars, MLP, Naruto, Nintendo, etc.

Skrillex ain't no exception.

Edited May 13, 2013 by coolwar13@yahoo.de

[Grepper 3,192]

I respect Skrillex as a musician, though most of his music starts to grate on my ears quickly.

To be more specific, I like much of his pre-drop stuff, but listening to bass drops for too long is kind of stressful for me. It's kind of like listening to more intense metal genres for extended periods of time.

[Alex Z 848]

People hate him because he's the most popular dubstep artist and consider his music to be trashy noise. I like him, but oh well not everyone has the same taste.

[Streiben 1]

"So I'm seriously tired of people always comparing everything to Skrillex and generally shitting on him."

 

That's called opinion.

 

No offense ♥

 

I wouldn't use such harsh words like sh...

But, i for my part can't respect him as an musician.

It's also not my kind of music.

[Wicked Funky 2,955]

I have no idea... I used o absolutely love some of his old songs (Still do) like "Rock n' roll", "kill EVERYBODY" and "scary monsters and nice spirits" when dubstep was kinda new (to me at least. But I'm not a fan of his newer music, I'm not gonna hate him for it either.

[Shadowdragon606060 16]

I like Skrillex. and people only pretend to dislike skrillex because they want to seem cool and above the sheeple crowd. Even though disliking something just for being popular is STUPID.

[Megas 27,701]

It's cool to hate anything that's popular. That's why I don't do it

 

As for Skillrex