
'Brat,' 'Eusexua' and 6 more terms used by pop stars now used in everyday life
In the '90s, we would use words like 'word up' to acknowledge agreement (thank you Cameo), tell someone to 'talk to the hand' when we weren't listening, or describe something cool as 'phat' (as in, pretty hot and tempting). The '00s then brought us phrases like 'crunk' to describe getting wild, or declaring something 'bling-bling' to highlight its flashy extravagance. And just like today's 'cap' (a reference to lying, pulled directly from hip-hop), these terms crossed over from the airwaves into our daily conversations, showing just how much music shapes the way we speak.
It continues to this day, with a number of pop music's present-day champions throwing out words that have managed to enter almost everyone's vernacular, and if not, at least many of us can spot the reference. But sometimes, however, without truly understanding its meaning.
To make sense of these made-up or unorthodox terms, Preply, a platform focused on efficient progress in language learning, has broken down their meanings, where they came from, and how they've caught on with fans. Here are eight such terms that you'll no doubt hear in conversations at your next concert or music festival.
1 . Tropicoqueta - Karol G
A blend of trópico (tropic) and coqueta (flirt), Tropicoqueta describes a fun, confident, and laid-back aesthetic. It reflects the album's celebration of femininity, joy, and Latin culture through tropical rhythms, bright visuals, and a strong sense of identity. Whether you're soaking up the sunshine at the beach, sipping colourful cocktails by the pool, or heading to your favourite rooftop spot in a sundress, you're living the Tropicoqueta lifestyle. |Photo Sales
2 . Abracadabra - Lady Gaga
Abracadabra used to be something only magicians said. Now, you'll hear it shouted at pride parades, in nightclubs, and in communities everywhere. It's gone from a magician's catchphrase to a meaningful part of the language shared by Lady Gaga fans and the LGBTQ+ community. |for Spotify Photo Sales
3 . Feminominon - Chappell Roan
We've heard of feminine, and we've heard of a phenomenon, but we hadn't heard the two together until Chappell Roan merged them to create Feminominon, the title of her breakout hit. The word describes a feminine phenomenon, referring to someone who is expressing their femininity with confidence. Its reach has extended far beyond the song, having a massive impact on pop culture, inspiring merchandise, and influencing art. |for The Met Museum/Vogue Photo Sales
4 . Brat - Charli XCX
While brat existed long before Charli XCX's world domination, its meaning has completely flipped on its head. Once used to describe someone spoiled or misbehaved, the word has now been ameliorated, meaning reclaimed as something aspirational. In Charli's world, a brat is someone who's confident, fierce, unapologetic, and never afraid to push boundaries. Charli's culture-shifting, record-breaking album was so influential that brat was named Collins Dictionary's Word of the Year for 2024. |Photo Sales
Related topics: BoostMusicCultureArtistsAlbums
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Scotsman
6 hours ago
- Scotsman
The cost of concert tickets has risen four times quicker than inflation, study finds
This article contains affiliate links. We may earn a small commission on items purchased through this article, but that does not affect our editorial judgement. Are we reaching a point where to go to a concert in the United Kingdom for the average music fan will be a thing of the past? Sign up to our daily newsletter Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to Edinburgh News, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... As Oasis and Billie Eilish continue their UK tours this week, the topic of ticket prices once again has been a talking point. Many still recall seeing the Gallagher Brothers for just over £20 compared to the over £200 some fans paid - at face value. So are average music fans being priced out of seeing shows - and what could be done to prevent it, if anything? Is going to a concert set to be a thing of the past for many UK music lovers? That's been a continued question throughout 2025 after issues regarding the pricing of tickets to see Oasis, Lady Gaga, and many more set to make their way to our shores before the end of the year. Some will lay the blame on inflation compared to the '90s, when to see Oasis was the cost of a takeaway, while others think that artists perhaps are getting too greedy. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Then there is the issue of dynamic pricing; the increase in ticket value based on supply-and-demand, which became the cause célèbre when Oasis tickets went on sale in late 2024. Ticket prices are getting more expensive each year, but at what point does it become financially untenable to see your favourite act? | Canva So, how much more expensive is it to see a band on average in 2025? Coupon Birds undertook to examine the cost in the United States, which we've cross-referenced with UK inflation via the ONS and CPI indexes and the National Living Wage to make it more relevant to fan bases over here. While we're at it, though – what acts have increased their ticket prices by vast amounts over the past number of years? Methodology The data for this report was originally sourced from a press release by Coupon Birds, which compiled publicly available ticket price information for major U.S. tours and Pollstar data. The original prices reflected base ticket values, excluding VIP or specialty packages. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad For this report, we have adapted and updated that methodology to provide a UK-specific analysis through June 2025. All prices have been converted to British Pounds (£) and adjusted for inflation using the latest Consumer Price Index (CPI) data up to June 2025. The dataset was compiled and averaged across various venues and artists to account for regional variations in the UK market. How much more expensive is it to see a concert in 2025 compared to 1996? From 1996 to 2025, the average concert ticket price has seen a dramatic increase, rising by 428.7%. In 1996, the average ticket cost was £16.99. Today, that price has surged to, on average, £105.60. This increase far outpaces the general rate of inflation over the same period, which was 101.16%. If concert ticket prices had kept pace with inflation, a £16.99 ticket from 1996 would cost £38.49 in today's money. This means fans are currently paying nearly three times more than what would be expected based on inflation alone. The most significant jump in prices has occurred recently, with an 80.5% increase since 2021. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Who are the artists that are charging the most for fans to see them perform? Concert ticket prices for some of the most popular touring artists have experienced significant surges, far outpacing the general rate of inflation. This dramatic increase reflects fundamental shifts within the music industry, particularly in the streaming era where artists earn substantially less from recorded music, making touring a crucial revenue stream. These tours have become increasingly elaborate, featuring higher production costs and a greater reliance on VIP packages and meet-and-greet experiences to maximise revenue. The industry's adoption of dynamic pricing models, similar to airlines and hotels, further contributes to the fluctuating and often higher ticket costs, transforming concert tickets into premium commodities. The artists with the most substantial increases in ticket prices The Weeknd: +320.6% Kenny Chesney: +317.8% U2: +190.5% Lady Gaga: +179.6% Coldplay: +159.6% Taylor Swift: +114.3% George Strait: +90.1% Drake: +88.1% How long would it take an average fan to earn enough money to attend a high-profile concert? Let's take Oasis's reunion shows and the higher end of face value ticket prices through Ticketmaster for this example. To attend a high-demand concert like an Oasis reunion show, a fan earning the UK's National Living Wage would need to commit a significant portion of their working hours. With a ticket priced at £206.25 and the National Living Wage set at £12.21 per hour as of April 1, 2025, an individual would need to work approximately 16 hours and 54 minutes to cover the cost of just one ticket. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad It once again highlights the growing financial barrier to experiencing live music for many average fans. What could be done to eliminate the continued rise in concert ticket prices? If I could answer that, I'd maybe be able to fix many problems in music. But more transparency might be the key to demonstrating to fans what they are getting for such high prices. With international tours and the logistics involved, perhaps sneak peeks or previews into what fans could expect might elicit some psychic capital when it comes to paying 'top dollar' for a show, and perhaps more venues that aren't owned by larger touring and promotion companies might also help with a perceived 'monopoly' over touring venues. But the complaints about dynamic pricing are still ones I take with a pinch of salt. While yes, it is unfair to wait in line while the prices of tickets start to increase, it perhaps might not help the algorithm Ticketmaster uses (for example), when social media users admit they've had 30 different devices queuing up. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad That could potentially trick the algorithm used to think that there is an increased demand in tickets owing to the volume of people (or devices in this instance) that are after them. So, as unpopular of an opinion as it may seem, maybe we need to keep calm, wait, and perhaps not feed the algorithm quite as much with an abundance of mobile phones waiting in line. Maybe just opt for one device per person within a group and try that method instead? What is the most you have paid for a concert ticket, and have you noticed a huge increase in the cost of going to see your favourite band compared to previous years? Let us know your thoughts regarding ticket prices and if they're being less affordable by leaving a comment down below.


Metro
a day ago
- Metro
Miley Cyrus won't tour new album because of her mental health and sobreity
To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video Miley Cyrus has revealed why she won't be touring her latest album, Something Beautiful. The singer, 32, released her latest album on May 30, including the single End of the World, which has already earned 80million streams on Spotify. Despite the fantastic reception the new album received, the star has revealed that she has no intention to perform it on tour. Speaking with Good Morning America, Miley said that she doesn't feel that artists are supported while they are on tour. 'I do have the physical ability, and I have the opportunity to tour – I wish I had the desire, but I don't. I also don't think that there is actually an infrastructure that supports artists. She added that staying sober was another issue for her on tour: 'It's really hard to maintain sobriety when you're on the road, which is a really important, kind of pillar of stability in my life.' She added that on top of all of this, she also has to consider her mental health, as tour can come with crushing lows. 'None of this that I create would ever be possible without the way that I think about things. 'And I do think it's really hard to keep mental wellness [while touring]. You have so many thousands of people screaming at you, so [there's] dopamine, you're feeling a lot of love and then you totally crash at the end of the show. 'You start thinking that one person loving you is not enough; it needs to be 10,000, it needs to be 80,000.' In the interview, Miley mentioned Prince and added that she isn't the only artist to struggle with the intensity of touring. Famously, Michael Jackson hated touring, and stars like Shawn Mendes, Adele, and Zayn Malik have all been open about how their mental health has struggled with touring. The singer first went on tour in 2007 for the Best of Both Worlds Hannah Montana tour. She toured again in 2009 for the Wonder World Tour, and in 2011 in the Gypsy Heart Tour. She has also taken on two promotional tours, the 2015 Milky Milky Milk Tour in 2015, which consisted of just eight tour dates to support the album Miley Cyrus & Her Dead Petz (2015). In 2022, she also took on a mini 11-show tour, the Attention Tour to support of her seventh studio album, Plastic Hearts (2020). More Trending This isn't the first time that Miley has spoken honestly about how touring has affected her. Speaking to British Vogue in 2023, the star once again emphasised that she had 'no desire' to return to the stage, having last toured an album in 2014 with Bangerz. 'It's been a minute,' she said of her years-long break. 'After the last [headline arena] show I did [in 2014], I kind of looked at it as more of a question. And I can't. Not only 'can't', because can't is your capability, but my desire. 'Do I want to live my life for anyone else's pleasure or fulfilment other than my own?' she said. Got a story? If you've got a celebrity story, video or pictures get in touch with the entertainment team by emailing us celebtips@ calling 020 3615 2145 or by visiting our Submit Stuff page – we'd love to hear from you. MORE: Stevie Wonder clears up bizarre rumour that he's not really blind MORE: Bruno Mars says he's 'almost out of debt' after rumoured $50million gambling loss MORE: Horror director reveals why Amazon Prime series star was cut from new 90s reboot
.png%3Fwidth%3D630%26auto%3Dwebp%26quality%3D75%26crop%3D3%3A2%2Csmart%26trim%3D&w=3840&q=100)

Scotsman
a day ago
- Scotsman
Five ways we downloaded music during Y2K, and what happened to those services
The wild west of MP3 downloading - what we used to corral new releases before Spotify took over Sign up to our daily newsletter Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to Edinburgh News, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... Before Spotify become a household name, P2P clients were how many gained access to new music. Though some of the clients were controversial due to what they offered, many offered users experiences that are still present to this day. Here's five programmes many used to use to - ahem - download music to their MP3 and Minidisc players. It seems timely that I am writing this article on the day that news emerged that several unreleased tracks by Beyoncé were stolen from a car during her Cowboy Carter tour. While torrenting would be the option these days if anyone were to release them, back when the Y2K bug was considered a global issue, there were several different options instead. Many of those options were still illegal, but in some cases with the added caveat that a virus might hop along for the ride with the MP3 or zip file you'd added to your download queue. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Long before Spotify became a household name, and around the time Apple launched their revolutionary first iPod and their own music download service, many of us took to the World Wide Web armed with one of five programmes to access music that today is as easy as just swiping on a screen. The same could also be said about dating, but that's another story for another series of apps. It would be another wave of capitalist panic when Peer-to-Peer file sharing started coming into vogue around the turn of the millennium. While many felt that music should be free and that the likes of Napster were actually helping those get heard without the need for expensive radio campaigns, others equated it to a woodworker having a chair stolen from them. Who else remembers the classic 'you wouldn't steal a car' adverts played before every cinema outing back in the day? But for a generation of music listeners, where TikTok seems to be the conundrum facing musicians and copyright law, they might have missed all of this; the trials and tribulations of risking your computer security just to listen to that new Metallica or Spice Girls track. So, what did some of us of a certain age (and, apparently, low moral fibre) use to gain access to the latest musical releases, and where did those programmes go when streaming services became the norm? Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Fives ways we used to download music before Spotify existed Long before Spotify gave you the world of music at your fingertips, music fans used some 'less-than-legitimate' ways to download music back at the turn of the millennium. | Canva/Getty Images Napster We start with where most of us all began - launched in 1999 by Shawn Fanning, Napster was the original revolutionary. It was a centralized P2P file-sharing service primarily focused on MP3 music files. Its genius was in its simplicity: users could search a central server for songs, and the software would then connect them directly to other users' computers to download the files. At its peak in early 2001, Napster had nearly 80 million registered users. Napster became the poster child for copyright infringement . Its most famous legal battle was with Metallica, who, along with Dr. Dre, sued the company in April 2000 after discovering their unreleased song 'I Disappear' circulating on the platform - cue crude animations of Lars Ulrich and James Hetfield bellowing out 'Napster, bad!' However, the lawsuit that truly brought Napster down was the massive $20 billion infringement case filed by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), representing major record labels like A&M Records. The courts consistently ruled against Napster, rejecting its claims of "fair use" and holding it liable for contributory and vicarious copyright infringement. Faced with crippling injunctions and legal pressure, Napster was ordered to block copyrighted material and ultimately shut down its original free service in July 2001. The company filed for bankruptcy. In 2002, its brand and logo were acquired by Roxio , which rebranded its own streaming service as Napster 2.0, attempting to go legit with a paid subscription model. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Over the years, Napster's name changed hands multiple times (including Best Buy and Rhapsody). Today, the Napster brand still exists as a legitimate, paid music streaming service, albeit a much smaller player in a market dominated by Spotify and Apple Music. LimeWire While a more popular option after the heat Napster received, LimeWire was one of two P2P clients notorious for containing malware, adware and the ease of downloading viruses. | Limewire/Submitted One of two sure fire ways to infect your computer with a virus just for a chance at listening to a track before its release… Launched in 2000 by Mark Gorton, LimeWire quickly became one of the most popular decentralized P2P file-sharing clients after Napster's demise. Unlike Napster, LimeWire operated on the Gnutella network , meaning there was no central server controlling searches or file transfers. This decentralized nature made it harder to shut down. It was known for its user-friendly interface and became a go-to for music, movies, software, and more. LimeWire faced years of legal battles with the RIAA. In 2010, after a lengthy lawsuit initiated by Arista Records and other labels, a U.S. federal court judge issued an injunction ordering Lime Wire LLC to disable all file-sharing functionality of its software. The RIAA initially sought astronomical damages (reportedly up to $72 trillion) but eventually settled for $105 million. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Following the injunction, Lime Wire LLC stopped distributing its software, and later versions were disabled. While older versions (pre-5.5.11) remained functional for a time, the company itself ceased its operations related to file-sharing. In a surprising twist, the LimeWire brand was acquired by new management in 2021 (with no affiliation to the original company) and has been repurposed as an NFT marketplace and Web3 platform focusing on music and content. AudioGalaxy AudioGalaxy had a unique feature where music lovers would be recommended artists similar to what they have opted to listen to - similar to Spotify's related artists algorithm. | Reddit Created in 1998, AudioGalaxy was initially an MP3 indexing site that evolved into a robust P2P system with client software (the AudioGalaxy Satellite) and a web-based search engine. It gained popularity, especially after Napster's legal woes, known for its strong community features like chat-enabled groups and directly linking to other artists you might also like - almost a proto Spotify daily playlist before it existed. AudioGalaxy also faced a lawsuit from the RIAA in May 2002 due to the widespread sharing of copyrighted material. Despite its attempts to implement filtering mechanisms (which users often circumvented), the pressure was immense. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad In June 2002, AudioGalaxy reached an out-of-court settlement with the RIAA. As part of the agreement, it was required to implement a "filter-in" system, meaning only music with explicit consent from rights holders could be shared. This effectively ended its P2P file-sharing operations. It then licensed and rebranded itself as a promotional website for the Rhapsody music subscription service for many years. Kazaa Kazaa was the talk of schoolyards around the world back in the early '00s - part due to the ease of finding music and videos, part due to how much damage it caused to numerous PCs that lacked anti-virus software. | Reddit The second sure-fire way to end up infecting your computer with viruses - launched in 2001 by Dutch company Consumer Empowerment (later sold to Sharman Networks), Kazaa became one of the dominant P2P networks after the fall of Napster. It used the FastTrack protocol (which was also the basis for Skype) and allowed users to share not just music, but also videos, software, and documents. It was notorious for bundling adware and spyware, leading to many users opting for Kazaa Lite . Kazaa faced intense legal pressure globally. In 2001, a Dutch court ordered its owners to prevent copyright violations. In the US, the RIAA and MPAA (Motion Picture Association of America) filed suit, leading to the landmark MGM Studios, Inc. v. Grokster, Ltd. Supreme Court case (though Grokster was the named defendant, Kazaa's FastTrack protocol was central to the broader issue). Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad In Australia, the Australian Record Industry Association (ARIA) also sued, culminating in a 2005 ruling that Sharman Networks had "authorized" illegal file sharing by its users. The RIAA also pursued thousands of individual users for infringement, including the high-profile case against Jammie Thomas-Rasset. Kazaa's legal issues ended with a $100 million settlement paid to the four major music companies. Sharman Networks agreed to convert Kazaa into a legal music download service, but this venture ultimately failed. The original Kazaa file-sharing application effectively shut down around 2006. Like Napster, the brand was later licensed and briefly relaunched as a legitimate music subscription service, but it too failed to gain significant traction and is now defunct as a music service. Soulseek Soulseek was considered a more 'niche' community which mainly focused on rarer releases and bootlegs compared to other clients who focused on the more mainstream and popular. | Wikimedia Commons The music connoisseur's method of downloading; created by Nir Arbel around 2000, Soulseek was distinct from the outset. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad While it was a P2P file-sharing network, it was less about mainstream hits and more about fostering a community of music enthusiasts, particularly for underground, independent, and niche electronic music, rare tracks, and live sets. It emphasized sharing and community, with users often having specific rules for who could download from them. Unlike the other major players, Soulseek has largely avoided direct, high-profile lawsuits that led to its shutdown. Its more decentralized structure, combined with its focus on less commercial, underground music, made it a less attractive target for major record labels compared to the mass-market platforms. There have been instances of servers being targeted or legal pressure, but no singular, defining case that brought the entire network down. Soulseek still exists and is actively used today, maintaining its niche status. It has evolved, with an emphasis on its community and the sharing of diverse and often obscure music. While it's certainly not mainstream, it remains a beloved tool for audiophiles and those seeking music beyond the commercial charts. Did you ever use any of the software or websites mentioned in this article? Share the ways you used to access music in the new millennium by leaving your memories below.