Dubstep ruins what good music should be

There are lots of things that I really do enjoy about music and the music industry. I love all kinds of music, all differ­ent genres and artists. I love that a song, simple mechanical waves that oscillate through our eardrums, can give us that adrenaline rush, that extra burst of energy you need to get you through the day. I love catchy music, and being able to listen and sing along with your favorite words, spoken or sung by your favorite artist. I love how simple music is: just one push of a button, and you are locked in, plugged into the phenomenon that is music and sound.

As a music fan, I can honestly say there aren't many things that make me mad when it comes right down to it. How­ever, there is one trend in the music industry that I cannot stand, and as it has grown in popularity, I have proportion­ally grown a deeper hatred for it. I hate dubstep.Now, before I explain myself, I must say there are some catchy songs out there that will be consid­ered dubstep that I actually do enjoy. However, much of the genre (if you can even call it a genre) is garbled nonsense that is smushed together so tightly only someone like Snooki could come close to matching it. Dubstep by its very nature is gibberish. It's not meant to be understood, as the shock value of the randomness of the sound is supposed to be the appeal. Ever meet someone who speaks way too fast? You can't really understand what he is saying, and by the end, you really don't care; you're just impressed that the guy can talk so fast. Dub­step follows the same principle.

Now, I wouldn't have so much of a problem with dub­step if it didn't try to take over the entire music industry with its work. Every day, more and more regular songs are taken by dubstep artists and torn apart to create a totally new "re­mixed" version of the song. You hear remixes everywhere nowa­days; remixes have become the norm. My question is, how can you, as an ‘artist,' take someone else's work, rework it, and then call it your own? And even worse, as if it could get any worse, is the fact that you remix the song and then put it on the Internet for free! Utterly ridiculous. That's like me walk­ing into the Louvre, grabbing the Mona Lisa off the wall, spray painting graffiti all over it, and then giving it away for free on the Louvre website. I've just ruined the entire essence of what the Mona Lisa used to be, and it certainly does not belong in an established museum. That's not art.

Dubstep is a destructive art. It takes the very soul of what music actually is and remixes it into a deformed version of its former self. It takes point­less sounds and noises, puts them to a beat, and then calls itself what it longs to be. But I think the worst part about dubstep is the fact that it's so easy to do that anybody with a computer has the power to do it. It is this online sharing, remixing, and pirating that is killing the music industry, and dubstep is leading the charge. Why buy an artist's work on iTunes if the remixed version is way better - and it's free? There is no answer, and that is the problem.

For now, dubstep remains ever so inclined to infect any­thing it can get its hands on with its ridiculous debacle of constant noise cloaked as real music. Here's to hoping that it never gets its dirty, filthy hands on Beethoven's Fifth.