The scope of popular music is very broad, and the average music fan will only be exposed to some of the styles in his or her lifetime. Some creators emphasize that what they make is XX music, but music fans say it is also part of pop music (of course, they would not call all modern music pop music). "Popular" can be defined as "easy to be understood". For an unfamiliar melon, we can have a general understanding of it by looking at it and taking a bite. However, we cannot understand the two-dimensional foil, but Trisolaran people can understand it. , switching to pop music is like Luo Dayou?-?The difference between childhood and field recording, noise and the like. "Popular" can also be described as "there are many similar works, and you can grab them everywhere". For example, we think watermelon is very popular, but if there is only one watermelon in the world, it is not popular under this definition. If it is replaced by pop music, it is like Dai Penny's "Popular". "Crazy in Love" and many mediocre love song albums on the market (what a hard-working copywriter). If we determine the definition of "popular" as the first one above, and replace "popular" in the second definition with "low artistic value", will we separate the two things~Excellent among similar works, Those with special characteristics can be considered as artistic breakthroughs in this type of works. If you want to do something with high artistic value, you must either develop new forms (such as the first blues), or make good works within the framework of a certain current category (is the artistic value of metrical poetry high?). Rather than complex forms, poor work. Popular or not is a neutral evaluation, while art or not is currently considered a positive or negative evaluation. The Beatles’ works are very popular, but if you say that their works have low artistic value, are they willing to accept it? Let’s still use the term “artistic”. Let’s evaluate the quality of the work rather than the category of the work. In addition, pop music cannot be replaced by any art form, because in addition to melody, it also includes vocal performance and lyrics. For a form that cannot be replaced, can we say that the best parts of it have no artistic value? As far as melody is concerned, take the physicist Feynman as an example. He can make Nobel Prize-level contributions at first, but he can write college physics textbooks in a popular and meaningful way. It’s not that creators of serious music can’t bring their ideas to pop music. Chen Shanni?-?Farewell Song? Is it copying Chopin or developing and re-creating it? "Is the low vitality of popular music a reflection of its low artistic value?" Regarding this sentence, I think that the high artistic value and vitality will be reflected in the fact that the works have more hidden information, and can be listened to and updated all the time. There are actually many popular music works.