You could easily find Japanese equivalents of The Decemberists and The Pipettes.

Finding American equivalents of POLYSICS, Nino Trinca, Tokyo Jihen, Zazen Boys*, and Ali Project**...that's gonna be a bit more difficult.

*Serious, who else is doing this? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rvsL1H7Wbmo

**http://youtube.com/watch?v=MNu2TTV-8PI

edit: [quote="h2orowe"]I'd rather listen to You Can't Hurry Love a thousand times than Tom Sawyer ten times.[/quote]

quoted for YESSSS

.....I like Rush.

[quote="GoldenRhino"]Finding American equivalents of POLYSICS...that's gonna be a bit more difficult.[/quote]

DEVO

[quote="GoldenRhino"]
So. What is innovation to you? Or maybe you want to change your word altogether.
[/quote]

in·no·vate
- to introduce something new; make changes in anything established.
- to introduce (something new) for or as if for the first time: to innovate a computer operating system.
- Archaic. to alter.

I'd even accept stuff that falls into the archaic definition! I dont mean in terms of what is simply good because everything is good to someone.

[quote="h2orowe"]I'd say American pop. You said pop of all types, didn't you? Not just Brittney shit, amirite? [/quote]

urrite

[quote="jotobagginz"][quote="GoldenRhino"]Finding American equivalents of POLYSICS...that's gonna be a bit more difficult.[/quote]

DEVO[/quote]

Very true, but...it seems like POLYSICS are pretty much Devo cranked to 11, reverted back to childhood, injected with caffeine, wearing Christmas lights.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m9aL7tQhnwI

Maybe we should take them out of the equation, they're both quite.."innovative".

Which brings me to...CAMIO! Yes, we know what innovation [b]means[/b], but you never said why you immediately equate it to [b]quality[/b].

[quote="GoldenRhino"]You could easily find Japanese equivalents of The Decemberists and The Pipettes.

Finding American equivalents of POLYSICS, Nino Trinca, Tokyo Jihen, Zazen Boys*, and Ali Project**...that's gonna be a bit more difficult.

*Serious, who else is doing this? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rvsL1H7Wbmo

**http://youtube.com/watch?v=MNu2TTV-8PI

edit: [quote="h2orowe"]I'd rather listen to You Can't Hurry Love a thousand times than Tom Sawyer ten times.[/quote]

quoted for YESSSS[/quote]
Find me their Japanese equivalents and I'll find you the Japanese one's American equivalents after I listen to them.


Edit: I'm listening to this unsigned artist right now, named Kevin M. Kirker. He's really soft, mellow, "Americana" (as his myspace says.) Basically, he's a bit poppy and he plays a bunch of different instruments. Main two being guitar and harp. You heard it. The harp. In fact, the harp is the main instrument. That's pretty innovative if you ask me.

Edit 2: Oh, my bad. I forgot. The Pipettes are British.

[quote="GoldenRhino"]
Which brings me to...CAMIO! Yes, we know what innovation [b]means[/b], but you never said why you immediately equate it to [b]quality[/b].[/quote]

I think it shows people putting more thought and expressiveness into music if their music is originial and innovative. And a more original and innovative base of artists makes a more diverse and substantial array of music. And I think those are big parts of quality for objective purposes. Simply because generally there's a better chance of anyone finding something they like with a diverse selection then to bank of finding something in the narrow selection to settle for.

[quote="Camio"][quote="GoldenRhino"]
Which brings me to...CAMIO! Yes, we know what innovation [b]means[/b], but you never said why you immediately equate it to [b]quality[/b].[/quote]

I think it shows people putting more thought and expressiveness into music if their music is originial and innovative. And a more original and innovative base of artists makes a more diverse and substantial array of music. And I think those are big parts of quality for objective purposes. Simply because generally there's a better chance of anyone finding something they like with a diverse selection then to bank of finding something in the narrow selection to settle for.[/quote]

If you're talking about musical diversity, then the American music market wins by far, hands down, by any objective or subjective measures. Not only does the United States have a far more substantial music history, and not only does the United States have the largest music industry in the world, but the United States has been the focal point of the world-wide music industry since its existence.

I think, what GR means, is that lauding bands for innovation alone is stupid. I can be incredibly innovative by writing music by throwing darts at a keyboard, but that doesn't mean anyone's going to listen to it. The objective qualifications you put forth are therefore vague, and impossible to use.

Edit: Some of the best songs ever written were done so in five minutes. Thought and expressiveness are not only impossible to judge, but they are entirely subjective. Simply tying them to something you can objectively measure is logically flawed. No offense, but I think you're wrong on pretty much all accounts.

Edit2: Happy 1500, h2.

[quote="sheerheartattack"]Happy 1500, h2.[/quote]

Thanks. Now I just need to figure out what to do with my custom title.

Turn to me for advice.

[quote="sheerheartattack"][quote="Camio"][quote="GoldenRhino"]
Which brings me to...CAMIO! Yes, we know what innovation [b]means[/b], but you never said why you immediately equate it to [b]quality[/b].[/quote]

I think it shows people putting more thought and expressiveness into music if their music is originial and innovative. And a more original and innovative base of artists makes a more diverse and substantial array of music. And I think those are big parts of quality for objective purposes. Simply because generally there's a better chance of anyone finding something they like with a diverse selection then to bank of finding something in the narrow selection to settle for.[/quote]

If you're talking about musical diversity, then the American music market wins by far, hands down, by any objective or subjective measures. Not only does the United States have a far more substantial music history, and not only does the United States have the largest music industry in the world, but the United States has been the focal point of the world-wide music industry since its existence.

I think, what GR means, is that lauding bands for innovation alone is stupid. I can be incredibly innovative by writing music by throwing darts at a keyboard, but that doesn't mean anyone's going to listen to it. The objective qualifications you put forth are therefore vague, and impossible to use.

Edit: Some of the best songs ever written were done so in five minutes. Thought and expressiveness are not only impossible to judge, but they are entirely subjective. Simply tying them to something you can objectively measure is logically flawed. No offense, but I think you're wrong on pretty much all accounts.

Edit2: Happy 1500, h2.[/quote]

no offense taken. I made a thread worded with my opinion.

so I'll change the wording to be more acceptable for diverse opinions. Unfortunatly I cant change the poll title.

[b]this thread is now about the quality of japanese vs. american pop. and why.[/b]

[b]quality of music is largely subjective, end of topic, thank you for playing.[/b]

[size=150][b]WINNERS DON'T DO DRUGS.[/b][/size]

Perhaps a break from all the DEEP is in order. I wish we could play a rousing, hardcore 4-player bout of [i]The slide pursuit game [/i][b]Sorry![/b]