Quartets are supposed to make do with what they have; their vocals or a very small range of instruments, and even then the instruments need to accompany the vocals and take second place, not be the driving force behind the song and the vocals becoming the second force. It’s like listening to ragtime music in hard rock form, it just doesn’t feel right.
If you want to know an example of what I mean bu this, listen to this quartet do their rendition of ‘This is Halloween’.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=89LtMBrj-lM
No instruments at all, just their vocal chords, yet they sounded more…complete…than the Ponytones. If there needs to be instruments, they have to take a step back and let the vocals take center stage, like here.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oeEAvYcQ0RM
How would you suppose Derpibooru would feel if I reuploaded the picture but instead replaced the Confession Bear meme with a screenshot of the Ponytomes and then also go and say that I don’t outright hate the song but wish it went in a different direction right on the picture.
although i personaly dont realy care and rather liked the song as it is :V
the lack of pony in the pic is disturbing though.
@Background Pony #2E1A
most likely its because people here arent musicaly inclined and think of this post as just spam, its an art booru after all.
ALSO, maybe the singers couldnt produce the whole vocal range needed for these type of music and they opted for using instrumentals to boost it up a bit.
@And Brother I Hurt People
What defines music is really vague. The only common thing between any piece of music is that it has to do with the presence (*or even absence) of sound. The spectrum of music is too wide to generalize it all, otherwise. There is music theory, which is the study of the technical aspects of what makes sound achieve the effect you want, but by no means does it define what music is.
And none of that dictionary definition “arrangement of notes that sound pleasing to the ear” crap. Even with that definition, people’s tastes very immensely enough to cover just about anything, anyway.
*Just an example of what I mean John Cage’s 4’33” for piano is literally a person sitting at a piano for four minutes and thirty three seconds, playing absolutely nothing. It’s still considered music. It makes a weird kind of sense because when you listen to a song, you don’t consider the silent space between each note not to be music; you consider those spaces to be a part of the song as a whole. John Cage’s piece, with absolutely no actual notes played, just takes that idea and extrapolates.
4’33”: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gN2zcLBr_VM
No worries and thanks for understanding. I honestly wanted to love the song because I am just a huge fan of barbershop quartets and their huge range of natural vocals, so for me having the instruments be the driving force behind the song just didn’t feel right.
If you and others like the song, good for you. It’s just not my cup of tea and I just wanted to state why. It’s just really hard to convey the emotions you want through emotionless text without soundlike like a complete asshole.
Sorry, I must have read it more cynically than you intended. Apologies.
I’m not saying all music should follow the same thing. I have nothing against the song. I just think it would have been better if they did a different approach, but I’m not trying to blast it either
What’s that supposed to prove?
When I say rules, I don’t mean scales or solfege. I mean more along the lines of that you can’t point at a style of music and say “all music of this kind must do X”.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3dkyIxQJfNw
Pretty sure it does.
Otherwise, it’s just noise.