Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Good on her. Even my 70+ year old father thinks her music is interesting albeit creepy. Sorta reminds me a bit of a modernized Mazzy Star.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jons and Clix Pix
that’s a description for every decade of music including the 60s and 70s. Same homogenisation and narcissism, just a different beat
No, there is a quantitative drop off in diversity of sound/music/instruments since the late 80’s. Perhaps that is a result of the shifting nature of the music business. Please note I am not criticizing any era of music.
 
Billie Eilish is manufactured. And Of course those who disagree with you are some how less accomplished than those mention. Just because some one doesn't agree with your opinion doesn't make them inferior to what's being said. :rolleyes:
Don’t take it personally, I wasn’t replying to your post.

I never said they were the most accomplished writers, musicians, producers, etc. for their age; plenty are equally or more talented, I’m sure.

Let’s start a list, I’ll go first. At the age of sixteen, Jackson Browne wrote “These Days”. (Do yourself a favor and look it up if you’re not familiar. I like the live version on Solo Acoustic Vol. 1) A beautiful song melodically and lyrically:

Well I've been out walking
I don't do that much talking these days
These days
These days I seem to think a lot
About the things that I forgot to do
For you
And all the times I had the chance to

And I had a lover
But it's so hard to risk another these days
These days
Now if I seem to be afraid
To live the life that I have made in song
Well it's just that I've been losing
For so long


Well I'll keep on moving
Moving on
Things are bound to be improving
These days
One of these days
These days I'll sit on cornerstones
And count the time in quarter tones to ten
Don't confront me with my failures
I had not forgotten them

Words and music, at the age of sixteen. Ok, who’s next?
 
Last edited:
Can we all just move on from her.
Why do we all have to do it as a group? Is this “musical taste by committee”? Has anyone been forcing you to listen to Billie Eilish? Have you already learned that you are doomed to watch her documentary when its released? Who is doing this to you?

This thread is here because it’s discussing the news that Apple will be releasing a documentary.

The easiest way for you to move on is... go look at some other thread instead.

If, instead, what you want is for everyone else on the planet who likes her music to stop liking it, well good luck with that. She seems to have millions of adoring fans. I don’t think they’ll even hear your demand that everybody move on.

What kind of music do you like? I’m sure that we can explain to you how it’s unlistenable crap, if you’ll just let us know.
 
Last edited:
No wonder most of these talented people who get documentaries at age 18, end up full on drugs, getting wasted, being arrested by the police and generally acting like douches...

It is not their fault that society grooms them as incredibly special, makes them millionaires and eventually arrogant and completely distant/ignorant to actual world matters.

Most of Hollywood is also like this. Billionaires preaching everyone else about life matters and morality while they live in their mansions having absolutely zero real and actual issues, like 99% of the world has. Yet here they are, on their pedestals, completely out of touch with the real world, commenting on it.

Meanwhile true heroes get forgotten, nobody cares about them, they dont have :interesting stories" to tell because we live in a world where Kardashian's latest shopping spree if far more interesting and money making material...
 
I guess her style is marketable to the age bracket that Apple is aiming for in their Apple TV+ world. ?

Apple will probably do a 'This is Your Life' segment for their next program about her.
 
  • Like
Reactions: temptee
The "talent" you speak of is her brothers proficiency in music software & her social media savvy. She's the product of trending culture that peaked in 2019. Her social stock has already slipped in 2020 as I've noticed once fervent fans being their fickle selves & moving on to the next trend. Talent is one thing, being timeless is a whole other.
You mean we shouldn’t give her a Walk of Fame star just yet?
 
Last edited:
I don't know how people enjoy her sleepy stoner music enough to make a tv show about her.
It might not be for you, but the amount of talent her and her brother have is insane. That alone I have a ton of respect for as a musician. Stop being a hater for the sake of being a hater.
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: max2
I see your point about her achievement. But not every achievement needs a documentary. The Civip War needs a documentary. Jackie Robinson needs a documentary. These days it seems like one hit record gets you a star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame next to the likes of Alfred Hitchcock and Charlie Chaplin. This documentary reminds me of doing an autobiography in fourth grade.

Obviously I’m stating my opinion. Besides Apple, Eilish’s legion of adoring fans would disagree with me. But there it is.
Great comparison!
Why were the greats of the past only great after they could prove a dozen or two years that what they did and who they are was truly great! This isn't a pat on the back like you baked one good pie, it was that you spent every day of your life, while raising kids and paying the bills on your crap salary, continuing making amazing pies and cakes and decorations, proving that you were diverse, talented and worthy of the praise of those too tired to do any of the above, much less share that talent with the world.
AND many of those greats really didn't make any money until they had been at it for 10+ years. Speaking of Elvis as mentioned above, his first royalty check was $500 and he used it to buy new clothes because he was so poor.
 
Billie Eilish is manufactured. And Of course those who disagree with you are some how less accomplished than those mention. Just because some one doesn't agree with your opinion doesn't make them inferior to what's being said. :rolleyes:
The majority of artists are, in someway, manufactured.
The Beatles were manufactured. They were a rough covers band, performing around. Then a manager picked them up, Saw the potential that they had, made them more family friendly, gave them cool outfits and hair dues, gave them a talented producer Who helped polish their sound, and gave them a butt load of promotion. They had albums, merchandise, television specials, movies, the works. Plus, they were talented guys, so once they were big enough, they got full creative control to work on whatever they wanted to, and 60s kids ate it up like tic-tacs.
Same with all the Motown artists. Motown even had an entire department dedicated to songwriters for their artists. These songwriters jobs were to pump out hits.
so how is this any different than what has been done in the past with dozens upon dozens of artists. Her and her brother are making music, and posting it online. It started gaining popularity, so a label signed her, gave her tons of money, tons of equipment, tons of promotion, merchandise, and now a movie.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CarlJ
No, there is a quantitative drop off in diversity of sound/music/instruments since the late 80’s. Perhaps that is a result of the shifting nature of the music business. Please note I am not criticizing any era of music.
If anything, with the invention of the Internet, and with websites like Spotify, SoundCloud, band camp, YouTube, etc. music is more diverse now than it has ever been.
Anyone can go buy a cheap microphone, a sampler, a DAW, and any assortment of instruments, and make any type of music they want.
If you really look, you’ll find that outside of the Billboard charts, there’s a lot of cool stuff out there.
Some absolutely bazaar genres too, that push the limits of music experimentation.
Trust me, there is diversity out there if you look longer than 5 minutes.
Trust me, I’ve talked to people from previous generations. Genre saturation was a real problem then.
I recall talking to someone who lived through the mid to late 70s.
They told me that if you turned on the radio, it was nothing but disco. Went to the music store, nothing but disco. The Billboard charts? Flooded with disco.
nowadays, most people make their own radios, they use streaming services and listen to whatever they like. So genre saturations via radio and music stores isn’t really a problem anymore.
 
The majority of artists are, in someway, manufactured.
The Beatles were manufactured. They were a rough covers band, performing around. Then a manager picked them up, Saw the potential that they had, made them more family friendly, gave them cool outfits and hair dues, gave them a talented producer Who helped polish their sound, and gave them a butt load of promotion. They had albums, merchandise, television specials, movies, the works. Plus, they were talented guys, so once they were big enough, they got full creative control to work on whatever they wanted to, and 60s kids ate it up like tic-tacs.
Same with all the Motown artists. Motown even had an entire department dedicated to songwriters for their artists. These songwriters jobs were to pump out hits.
so how is this any different than what has been done in the past with dozens upon dozens of artists. Her and her brother are making music, and posting it online. It started gaining popularity, so a label signed her, gave her tons of money, tons of equipment, tons of promotion, merchandise, and now a movie.
That’s a great story. It’s not really the Beatles’ story, but it’s an interesting narrative you’ve got there.
 
There a song about it and everything.
There are multiple songs about it. Most people know “American Pie.” “Three Stars” was released within a few months of the event. I’ve got a couple different versions from iTunes, one recorded by Eddie Cochran.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CarlJ
Free speech is most certainly NOT allowed here, just like any other privately run website. That’s not a right you’re entitled to here.

But within the terms of service you agreed to when you registered, well, post away!

And I’m sure it’s ok with you if others do the same—even if one’s actual opinion is something you consider to be “blind adoration”?

There are copious amounts of blind adoration on any Apple website, hence the common phrase 'Apple fanboys' and as an Apple customer I am beyond okay with that state of things.

Yes, I assumed free speech within the terms of service. Varied opinions make the world spin round. People who use the term 'hater' to describe all who disagree with their apparently God like opinions must have missed some school at some point at least the day the meaning of opinion was discussed.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.