I'm definitely not saying youtube is bad. But to put a song you wrote or made on youtube, it's literally as easy as 1 2 3. Music doesn't have the value it had 30 years ago. Making music used to take so much effort. You had to record a demo, mail it to a record company, if they rejected you, you had to find another one until they did. With youtube, there are talented people who put their music there, but there are also idiots who use garage band or some other free software.
Not to mention. We all listen to music for free on youtube now. There is no person who could possibly say, "I have never listened to a song off of youtube." 20 years ago, the only way to listen to music was on a CD. 35 years ago, the only way was a cassette tape, and before that, vinyl records. People actually spent money on their music.
It can also be considered the worst. I'm not saying it's bad, but it's not the perfect solution. I'm just saying Youtube changed the music industry, a lot.
But don't you see? To quote DDP, that's not a bad thing, that's a good thing!
Who the hell is going to listen to 'some idiot on garageband' as you put it? Compare that to the number of people that would listen to the next big band, that are able to because they uploaded their songs there. I don't really see what you're saying about the demos thing because songs have to be recorded one way or another, but the great thing about the internet is a) the cream will likely rise and b) you get access to a whole bunch of awesome shit that would never see the light of day if it was up to the record companies.
People used to spend money on their music. People also used to ride horse and carts to work. Times change.
I'm not saying these genres take no skill. But they don't require nearly as much as genres like Classical (which I consider to be the most superior and skilful). You can't even hope to compare Neo-Classical composers like Ludovico Einaudi to any pop, rap or electronic artist in the world. Though I'd like to see you try.
In response to rap - I have been exposed to what people call ACTUAL rap, and I don't see it as any more artistic. Yes, rap and hip hop are a lot like classic punk in that a lot of the time they both stem from discontent with society and the desire to make a message. But musically they can't be compared to genres such as jazz or classical.
In response to electronic - One thing which, to me, separates out 'real' music from the rest is commitment, something which is absent from electronic artists. Playing instruments like the guitar or the piano at a world-class level takes decades of constant commitment, while creating electronic mixes requires nowhere near this level of engagement, or the saving up of money. One of my friends pirated Fruity Loops last year and learned how to make the same beats and mixes you hear in clubs in under a week.
On rap: it's arguably the rawest form of poetry you can find anywhere in music. The fun here lies in wordplay, and I can think of a few instances that are immensely clever and do take a level of skill to think up. Less than classical? You're right, it is impossible to compare, but not in the way you implied. It's like saying what requires more skill, being an electrician or being a plumber? Different types of skills needed that cross over at parts, but not enough to directly compare.
On electronic: again, like with anything, there's grade-a electronic and then there's the "any old stuff" you hear in clubs, which is what your friend learnt. Hell, give me a week and I could write a rap song. I could also write a jazz song and a classical piece. But it wouldn't exactly be groundbreaking stuff.
Music sucks nowadays. Done.
so wrong lol