930 Forums
=> GENERAL DISCUSSION => Topic started by: anarchist on October 02, 2005, 08:55:00 pm
-
late 60's, mid-late 70's,early 80's,early 90's. am i wrong or does all the best new music copy the time periods i listed? is 99% of all the current music and bands a waste of time?
-
yes.
i thought perhaps it was because i am getting older [35 now], but no, i think alot of bands these days sound like as beavis said to butthead once while seeing a video come on tv "OH GOD beavis [with lisp], not another group of whining english mama's boys" as they preceded to mockingly sing along something like the cure [who are in fact good tho]. :D
-
Originally posted by anarchist:
late 60's, mid-late 70's,early 80's,early 90's. am i wrong or does all the best new music copy the time periods i listed? is 99% of all the current music and bands a waste of time?
Which centuries are you talking of? :D
Even Arnold Schoenberg has been credited with saying that there is still a lot of good music left to be written in C Major. For that matter, there is far more good music available than you can ever listen to. That is what is frustrating.
-
Madonna's still got a few good albums in her.
-
so long as shes got the syph, right?
-
<img src="http://www.magiclibrary.net/rarities/annoying-kingdoms-dark-sylph.jpg" alt=" - " />
-
1 2 3 4 Whatever happened to good music? You know in the days when you could feel it?
It was almost sexual, sending shivers up your spine. This, I believe is
because songwriters were not restricted by the small music dictatorship which
now exists. Let's hope the future holds something better than the present and
let's leave the past alone. The music business is incapable of bringing music
to the future, as it sits just waiting to pounce on any third rate trend,
milking it to death, once again putting money where the music is not. I only
wish I was born before all the great ideas were used. While I struggle to
working around this, the most annoying thing is watching other people succeed
through stealing them. I could have been a legend in my own time; I could
have sold a lot of records; I could have enjoyed it as well. I could have
been a lot of things. One thing that I know I am and will always be: I am the
greatest.
I bumped into this bloke the other day we used to know in school. We didn't
say 'hello' because he had his hair slightly perked and I had all mine shaved
off. He was always a bit of a clown. He used to be a hard man, but he did
his homework, because he knew that one day he'd be going places. I knew I
should have asked him there and then 'was he happy now that he'd finally got
there?' He goes to bed thinking of ways to fiddle ten more pounds on his
expenses. Me? I go to bed thinking of all the reasons why I am the greatest.
We always use other people as the mirror in which we judge ourselves. So, we
are constantly changing to meet their expectations. Maybe we've forgotten the
meaning of the word 'individual.' It's as if everything we do or think is
valued for its conformity. Anything fresh or original is hacked down and
always brought down to size. You don't even think for yourself, as a life
that is led for you is some kind of problem. You wouldn't recognize a new
idea if it spat in your face and screamed out [?]. Who am I to
talk? Who the hell do I think I am? I am the greatest.
Welcome to the wonderful world of show business. The dark and dank place
rarely lit by the harsh light of reality. I look around and I see big
mouthed rock stars with opinions on everything and answers to nothing.
Burnt out old men with money to burn. Bandwagons full of bands with
sycophantic fans with no lives of their own. A place where image is king and
music is a poorer relation that I can relate to. I am the greatest.
I am the greatest.
I am!
-
I definitely think that there are few original ideas these days. Clap Your Hands Say Yeah is trying to be the Talking Heads, Elkland is trying to be Erasure, everyone else is trying to be Gang of Four or Wire or the Fall or the Cure, and not doing a good job at it. Not that there aren't some decent records being made today, but it's going to be interesting how a lot of this stuff stands up in 5 or 10 years. One has to admire someone attempting diversity or following through with an original thought, but a lot of stuff today is missing the element of danger, and that is what makes rock'n'roll exciting and vital. Imagine how edgy it would have been to listen to Black Sabbath or the Stooges in 1970, or living in England in 1977 and listening to the Sex Pistols or the Damned.
Just call me...
<img src="http://www.citynerd.com/simpsons/grandpavoice.gif" alt=" - " />
-
What about Coldplay?
-
thank you, a house.
-
Originally posted by clouds R²:
What about Coldplay?
is that an argument for there still being great music created? they sound like U2 with a piano and a vocaliizing hobbit. don't get me wrong, I appreciate the poppiness and all but ... yeeesh
-
Fisty, I was being sarcastic. I thought that Coldplay was the new Radiohead?
Neither band I have ever heard.
-
Huge difference between Coldplay and Radiohead. I actually think that Radiohead do something pretty unique and interesting and make a genuine stab at trying to write good music and defy convention. Coldplay really put me to sleep and I hate Chris Martin's voice.
-
I think this is an argument that is rehashed a lot; a lot of people thought that the music of the early-90's was simply derivative of the 70's - Black Sabbath, Led Zeppelin, etc. I don't know that we can pinpoint what will be remembered as the actual music of the 00's yet. We're not removed from it; the fact is, the things that we tend to think aren't derivative are those that have less definitive influences. right now, we're at a heyday of people who grew up in the late 70's and 1980's who really liked dance music and new wave. Consequently, that's probably the music that they want to make. 20 year cycles, after all - its when the people who listened to the music as kids are finally old enough and talented enough to make it themselves.
-
"t" comes before "s"
point taken
Originally posted by clouds R²:
Fisty, I was being sarcastic. I thought that Coldplay was the new Radiohead?
Neither band I have ever heard.
-
The answer is absolutely not.
I'm sure somebody said the same thing in the 18th Century about Bach and Handel, then came Hyden and Mozart. So that must be the end. Then came Beethoven. Then Schubert, Mendelssohn, and Chopin; then Wagner, Brahms, and Verdi. That must be the end.
Then came Stravinsky.
This was over a 300 year period.
Rock and roll is what, 50 years old - 70 max? And you're already giving up? Please.
Now go to your local record store, scour for something obscure and take a chance on something.
You might even like it.
-
The comparison with classical music is not apt, because that is a form with infinite complexity and possibilities. 90 percent of rock, whether it's classic or indie relies on the same three or four chords, and the same old drummer-bassist-guitarist configuration, with a few variations. You get too far away from those configurations and it's no longer rock.
I can think of very, very few truly original sounds in the last 20 years. Even punk, which was supposed to be a huge groundbreaking moment is mainly just 60s pop played faster and louder.
-
i don't think i agree that the comparison with classical music isn't apt. take classical music for solo instruments - piano as an ideal example. I think its very safe to say that piano music evolved over time, and continues to do so today. and the piano has the same 88 keys now as it used to 300 years ago.
rock music can be many things, and I think there is a fair amount that is pretty original that is coming out. and I also don't think that the instrumentation is as restricted as you're making it - what about bands like the Verve or Spiritualized who make extensive use of string arrangments? it might not be on the mainstream radar, or even in the catalogue of most indie snobs, but i think its definitely out there, and will continue to be so. and some of it (see: the Mars Volta, as an example, even though I don't particularly care for them; I also think the Most Serene Republic record is very innovative and interesting - they'll be at 9:30 with Metric) has been having some success.
-
To answer your question, certainly not! That's just the ramblings of an old fart. Believe me, I've been around long enough to hear this from a variety of people who are settling in with their lives and just getting bored with music, all due to their own positions within their own life's path. We'll continue to have lots of good music along with a whole lot of crap. It's all part of the evolution of music.
-
I'll preface this by saying that I despise more "out there" and "challenging" music than at least 98% of this board. But I think it's so funny reading ppl here demanding NEW and ORIGINAL kinds of music yet nobodies comin' out their shell for these fun,wildly fascinating, and at times mindblowingly transcendent shows at warehouse next door, dc9, 611 florida, dc arts center, etc, etc. If anyone cares, these are a couple of bands/artists coming through the district in the next month that I feel are expanding upon traditional, ordinary aesthetic experiences in creative and exciting ways:
LoVid -Next Tuesday at Dc9. if you caught the visual music exhibit at the hirshorn this summer, you'll totally dig this. synasthesia via dirty diy electronix, video projections and a knack for tasteful theatrical presentation. Like seeing an audio/video installation come to life.
Mouthus-Oct 28 at Warehouse. Thats a Friday. If you've never hit up a show here, the PA is not the best in the world. Sound is hit or miss really but the quality level of acts that have come through this place in the past couple of years has been unparalleled. Anyways, Mouthus rules all. Best band out of New York right now as far as I'm concerned. Will fuck with your head. Beautiful.
and if you're really up for a challenge, check out the finest avant troupe the east coast has to offer---straight out of filthy Bmore, Nautical Almanac. They take DIY ethics to new extremes, although they are probably more likely to be following in the path of eastern european free jazz cats rather than some overpraised snores from DC. Anyways, these goofs are playing 611 Florida next friday with some other bands that should all be interesting. Plus, they know how to party. Go to a show at their house, you'll know what I mean. Bust out the Baltimore Club music!!!!
-
shoot ur shot knows what's up. it really is funny hearing people complain about how there is nothing new and original anymore, while some of the most vital, interesting, and innovative music is being performed a few miles from the computer they're tying on. it's there, it always has been and always will be; the problem is, you're not there.
people need to broaden their myopic views on what music is, even rock 'n' roll. i completely disagree with doctor doom's statement above: pop music may be limited to the same 4/4 time signature and the same three or four chord progressions, but rock doesn't necessarily have to abide by those widely accepted rules of harmony. there are still many different ways to compose music with a steady backbeat, and even more to compose music free of those constraints. you're not gonna hear it on the radio, and you're not gonna read about it in rolling stone or spin, but if you dig down deep enough, you'll find a well of mostly untapped -- and underheard -- musical ideas.
so my answer is definitely, no, all the great music hasn't been created yet. there will be some great new music created shortly, whether it's folk, metal, improv, or pop, and i'm eager to hear it.
-
So what this thread is all about is nothing more than I've been saying for ages.....MOST NEW MUSIC TODAY IS SHITE
-
Problem is that the musical landscape is always littered with sound-alike/cookie cutter acts and of late there is an increased trend towards style over subtance acts. Whats lacking is the "influenced by" acts.
Style of substance is where the image is created first and the songs are written as an after thought. Think Ashlee Simpson, Kings of Leon, Bravery, All American Rejects..
There is the Warped Tour/Take Action "punk", emo and "metal", which is "thriving" on it's abliltiy to spew out an endless supply of cookie cutter screaming guy and cookie monster bands.
Since the record industry has become so album oriented, there are more acts which are coming out with first albums without getting a chance to fully develope their songwriting skills, resulting in way to much filler between the gems. Maximo Park is good example of this, they show potential but the album could have easily been pared down to another EP.
It's been great this year to be able to see The Pixies, Gang of Four and Slickee Boys. Acts that created an orginial sound, verses those newer acts that set out to sound like a specific act from the past. i.e Interpol, Kasabian, Kaiser Chiefs..
I have no problem with artists that wear their influences on the sleeve as long what they create stands apart from the orginial. Being able to write and arrange great songs is what matters most to me. These are the acts that can get easily lost in the vast waste land of pro-tooled, band wagon jumping acts, etc.
These are artists still creating great music...
Baltimore's Myracle Brah take a healty dose of influence from the classic power pop of the 60's and adds in some 70s rock/punk attitude. Just striaght up great catchy rock songwriting, not unlike Guided by Voices.
There is no doubt, that The Sugarplastic (http://www.sugarplastic.com/) hasen't been inspired by The Beatles, XTC, etc. But they took those influences and others and have put out my favorite album of the year. Problem is that it could be overly quirky and clever for it's own good.
Eugene Edwards's (http://www.eugeneedwards.com)influences are clearily Rockpile, Squeeze and Elvis Costello. But, he takes them and creates a fantastic collection of solid pop songs. Kosmette loaded his record on her iPod on my recommendation and listened to and enjoyed it for several weeks without knowing who he was.
De Novo Dahl, The Magic Numbers, and The Delagdos (RIP), have each taken cues from a various pop sources and created thier own signatures sounds.
So don't give up hope, there is still great new music out there!
-
Originally posted by snailhook:
shoot ur shot knows what's up. it really is funny hearing people complain about how there is nothing new and original anymore, while some of the most vital, interesting, and innovative music is being performed a few miles from the computer they're tying on. it's there, it always has been and always will be; the problem is, you're not there.
people need to broaden their myopic views on what music is, even rock 'n' roll. i completely disagree with doctor doom's statement above: pop music may be limited to the same 4/4 time signature and the same three or four chord progressions, but rock doesn't necessarily have to abide by those widely accepted rules of harmony. there are still many different ways to compose music with a steady backbeat, and even more to compose music free of those constraints. you're not gonna hear it on the radio, and you're not gonna read about it in rolling stone or spin, but if you dig down deep enough, you'll find a well of mostly untapped -- and underheard -- musical ideas.
I agree with this 100%.
There's tons of great, innovative, new music out there from all over the world.
-
I think all of the great music HAS been created. But there are still plenty of good ways to resynthesize and repackage it so that we will enjoy it for years to come.
I don't want to be challenged by music, I want to be comforted. I want to listen to the Libertines because they remind me of the Clash, and that's comforting. Someone else may find the Libertines too challenging, and opt for the comfort of Clay Aiken.
Bottom line: I think most people would agree with me. Even those of us who like our music with an edge would agree that we prefer the familiar to the unfamiliar.
-
Originally posted by Xavier Bush, Power Forward:
I think all of the great music HAS been created. But there are still plenty of good ways to resynthesize and repackage it so that we will enjoy it for years to come.
So what your saying is new music can never be GREAT because all music created before it was GREAT. Enjoy your armchair and watching bitchy people get judged by pompous business tychoons... Me I'll still be out there listening to GREAT new music
-
I would like to think I put myself out there and try to see as much music as possible. And yet, the very best thing I heard last year was the DVD by the Screamers, a band that was never recorded and existed for a few years in the late 70's. It's not that I don't WANT to like a lot of more current bands. There are some great ones that do make some good records. But compared to the musical renaissance of the late 70's, there just aren't as many original ideas. I would never say that all current music sucks...of course there are some interesting things out there, but when one knows what came before today's hot new cool bands, it makes them all seem kind of irrelevant.
-
it has now...
http://music.myspace.com/thedarkness (http://music.myspace.com/thedarkness)
-
Yes, but all of the bands you mention above, some of them even great, are ALL DERIVATIVE.
Of course there will continue to be great music created, forever and ever. But I took the question to be referring to new genres of music. I don't think any of the "new" genres that have sprung up in the last 20 years have been great.
Originally posted by kosmo vinyl:
Originally posted by Xavier Bush, Power Forward:
I think all of the great music HAS been created. But there are still plenty of good ways to resynthesize and repackage it so that we will enjoy it for years to come.
So what your saying is new music can never be GREAT because all music created before it was GREAT. Enjoy your armchair and watching bitchy people get judged by pompous business tychoons... Me I'll still be out there listening to GREAT new music [/b]
-
So it's been downhill the minute the first human pounded two rocks together?
-
No, at that point there was still great music to be invented. At the point we're at now, music has jumped the shark. Sure, they can still produce great music. And they can still produce music that is innovative and original. But a combination of both? Nah. Not unless your ears can tolerate bands like Need New Body. And most people's can't. Even people who claim to be music dweebs.
Originally posted by kosmo vinyl:
So it's been downhill the minute the first human pounded two rocks together?
-
Well I'll download Needs New Body and let you know... although based on what Allmusic says their sound is derived from several sources...
-
and "jumped the shark" has "jumped the shark"
and besides great new music can always been created because there always going to be new tools and techniques to create and record music with.
-
I think all of the great music HAS been created.
which could also be said about film, novels, narrative in general. structurally there's not much differnce between songs by slayer and autechre; there's a beginning, middle and end, crescendo's and breakdowns, sometimes there're lyrics , sometimes not. the difference is mostly in styling.
I think wat may have prom,pted this thread tho, is the fact that there's a lot of homogeneity and recycling - ie. Libertines to Clash - going on in (pop) music. But it's always been this way.
-
Not unless your ears can tolerate bands like Need New Body. And most people's can't. Even people who claim to be music dweebs.
need new body are not even that inaccessible. i book a hell of a lot more challenging bands than them. in fact, some of their material is pretty damn catchy. NNB have plenty of disparate influences and combine them in a way that is fresh. whether it's your style or not, it is hard to question their musical ability.
xavier/rhett, you do have a valid point in that the majority of people don't want to be challenged or confronted and really do just want to be comforted with the familiar. after being involved in the avant-garde/extreme music scene for years, both attending and promoting shows, i have come to realize that most of this stuff, despite how beautiful or transcendent i find it, is simply not appealing to most people weaned on pop/rock convention. i don't expect the masses to appreciate free jazz, abrasive noise, or bludgeoning sludge-metal. on the other hand, i don't understand why artists like jack rose and laura cantrell aren't selling out the 9:30 club and DAR.
aside from debating what does and does not appeal to the masses, what isn't debateable is that there are no new sounds and textures and forms being created. i guess if you want to be truly accurate, you can say that the frontier of alien sounds was reached when stockhausen and xenakis and their peers in the '50s discovered and pioneered electronic music. the use of extreme volume has already been explored by blue cheer, motorhead, and every death metal band. still, invention is possible by mixing all sorts of instruments, lyrics, rhythms, melodies, and styles, and the possibilities are endless.
this argument may pertain to pop, but music encompasses such a wide range of cultures and approaches, that it is ignorant to say that there is nowhere to go from here. i find great music from the 1800s, the 1920s, the 2000s, and every year in between, and we don't even know 99% of what's out there.
-
Pop music has pretty much been derivative since the dawn of time. And make no mistake, whatver nuanced labels y'all put on it, indie, punk, brit-pop, goth, what have you -- it's all just pop. Nothing wrong with it, but let's be honest.
Nothing in human creation is ever totally "new." If it was, we wouldn't recognize it or like it.
-
I love pop music.
<img src="http://www.tportal.hr/2005/02/11/0713007.19.jpg" alt=" - " />
-
Originally posted by Doctor Doom:
Nothing in human creation is ever totally "new." If it was, we wouldn't recognize it or like it.
He's right. Remember "New" Coke? It was a massive failure.
-
"New Coke" was the most brilliant guerilla marketing technique in the history of modern marketing.
Coke is fighting a losing battle to Pepsi, which has been gaining in popularity as a result of a successful advertising campaign (remember the Paula Abdul commercials?). Consequently, Coke decides to "retire" Coca'cola Classic, and introduce "New Coke." They make a big deal of this - ads saying how this is going to revolutionize Coke and reinvigorate the product line.
But here is the thing - Coke didn't need to plan to follow through with "New Coke" if it failed. Here's the scenario:
Coke makes enough product to accomodate the first few shipments of "New Coke." At the same time, they monitor customer reaction. Everybody feels that they have to try "New Coke," just from a curiousity standpoint. So the first few shipments sell without a problem. Coke claims "we're selling so fast that we can't keep it in stock." But the reality is that they just didn't make enough product, because they want to guage reaction. When the public starts saying that "New Coke" sucks, they realize that their original product is better.
So what does Coke do? Launches a new ad campaign, about three months or so later after "lackluster sales" (which is really resulting from limited product being shipped) saying that they are listening to the consumer, and bringing back the original Coca'cola (which really, was the plan all along). Now, Coke as a company is a hero - they listen to the consumer and respect their opinion. In addition, they've dominated headlines and stolen the spotlight back from Pepsi. "New Coke" is pulled off the shelves, and Coca'cola Classic returns. To massive, massive sales of appreciative consumers.
Absolutely the most brilliant move in marketing ever.
-
need new body are corny
i don't get why cramming 50 different genres in a 7 minute song seems like such a good idea to so many quirky 20something music enthusiasts that form bands. transcending genres is fine, deconstructing pop music cool but so many bands do it so tastelessly and without giving it much thought at all... i swear the mothers of invention are responsible for some of the worst underground music ever.
-
Originally posted by shoot ur shot:
need new body are corny
i don't get why cramming 50 different genres in a 7 minute song seems like such a good idea to so many quirky 20something music enthusiasts that form bands. transcending genres is fine, deconstructing pop music cool but so many bands do it so tastelessly and without giving it much thought at all... i swear the mothers of invention are responsible for some of the worst underground music ever.
really? this why i find the Go! Team and it's ilk so unlistenable... maybe i take an F for not turning in my book report...
-
Originally posted by callat703:
"New Coke" was the most brilliant guerilla marketing technique in the history of modern marketing.
Coke is fighting a losing battle to Pepsi, which has been gaining in popularity as a result of a successful advertising campaign (remember the Paula Abdul commercials?). Consequently, Coke decides to "retire" Coca'cola Classic, and introduce "New Coke." They make a big deal of this - ads saying how this is going to revolutionize Coke and reinvigorate the product line.
But here is the thing - Coke didn't need to plan to follow through with "New Coke" if it failed. Here's the scenario:
Coke makes enough product to accomodate the first few shipments of "New Coke." At the same time, they monitor customer reaction. Everybody feels that they have to try "New Coke," just from a curiousity standpoint. So the first few shipments sell without a problem. Coke claims "we're selling so fast that we can't keep it in stock." But the reality is that they just didn't make enough product, because they want to guage reaction. When the public starts saying that "New Coke" sucks, they realize that their original product is better.
So what does Coke do? Launches a new ad campaign, about three months or so later after "lackluster sales" (which is really resulting from limited product being shipped) saying that they are listening to the consumer, and bringing back the original Coca'cola (which really, was the plan all along). Now, Coke as a company is a hero - they listen to the consumer and respect their opinion. In addition, they've dominated headlines and stolen the spotlight back from Pepsi. "New Coke" is pulled off the shelves, and Coca'cola Classic returns. To massive, massive sales of appreciative consumers.
Absolutely the most brilliant move in marketing ever.
Jeez I was just making a sarcastic comment. Spare me the Advertising 101 lecture. Was this case in one of your Marketing textbooks?
-
Originally posted by kosmo vinyl:
Originally posted by shoot ur shot:
need new body are corny
i don't get why cramming 50 different genres in a 7 minute song seems like such a good idea to so many quirky 20something music enthusiasts that form bands. transcending genres is fine, deconstructing pop music cool but so many bands do it so tastelessly and without giving it much thought at all... i swear the mothers of invention are responsible for some of the worst underground music ever.
really? this why i find the Go! Team and it's ilk so unlistenable... maybe i take an F for not turning in my book report... [/b]
haha i actually like the go! team (when are they coming to 930?) but it appears to me that they are coming from more a hip hop collage/dj background. besides, they're british. my statement applies to overindulged americans with no attention span.
-
Jeez I was just making a sarcastic comment. Spare me the Advertising 101 lecture. Was this case in one of your Marketing textbooks?
Ha. I was a history major. Never took a marketing class in my life.
-
Originally posted by callat703:
"New Coke" was the most brilliant guerilla marketing technique in the history of modern marketing.
and here i thought the whole campaign was TO change "classic" coke. there are testimonials from long-time coke drinkers that the "classic" coke tastes very different from the coke before "new coke."
-
well, I looked into it, and apparently I'm wrong.
but I still like my version better.
http://www.snopes.com/cokelore/newcoke.asp (http://www.snopes.com/cokelore/newcoke.asp)
-
There will always be great music/songs created
-
Originally posted by callat703:
well, I looked into it, and apparently I'm wrong.
but I still like my version better.
http://www.snopes.com/cokelore/newcoke.asp (http://www.snopes.com/cokelore/newcoke.asp)
True or not, I'd hardly call your version "guerilla marketing".
-
No? Why not?