Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Bad Dog Cafe' started by 3-Chord-Genius, Feb 7, 2019.
That still makes me want to dance more than the modern equivalent.
reply to strangerNY eric clapton can't play no more either does that mean you just erase everything of the past. Is it what have you done lately all that matters. Dylan has been on the road for over thirty years and still remaining relevant not just singing the oldies. i think any musician over age seventy and over fifty years as a musician deserves a little slack.
I'm not dissing anyone here, and I honestly don't understand why you think I am. I like a lot of Classic Rock, I'm just not that sentimental about it. I do prefer young Clapton to the more recent stuff, but that's really neither here nor there. And I absolutely love going to see Dylan - because I love seeing him continually re-arranging 'the oldies' (and yes, his shows nowadays are full of his early stuff but he reinvents them from tour to tour), and his band is absolutely stellar.
It was explained to me that Dylan has zero interest in being a nostalgia act, and he purposely deconstructs his iconic tunes specifically to drive away the people who want to see the 1967 Dylan. And I think that's an extremely brave and very smart thing to do at this point in his career and I find it extremely interesting to watch.
Music is all personal taste, man. I like bands like Muse and Biffy Clyro and Crobot, and Jenny Lewis and Frank Turner and Jason Isbell. Given the choice, I'll go for the new stuff if I listen to music at all. But if a Classic Rock tune comes on, I don't recoil and turn it off. It's just not my first choice to listen to any more, as brilliant as some of it is and always will be.
I think that there is a lack of good producers in the recording industry. It seems for a number of years now that producers are looked at for their recorded sound rather than the ability to work a good song into a great song. So many talented artists for a while now have just pumped out reasonably good material, but never reach great heights on record- that's what I have been feeling over recent years.
Looking back to the old school producers like George Martin, Mickie Most, Glyn Johns, Phil Spector, Jerry Wexler, Brian Wilson etc- it was really about building the song and working to the artists strengths, not about what preamps are used in the recording console. A lot of what we have been hearing for a while now may not have made it to release under some of those old school producers...
Maybe it's the gatekeepers of what's new to get played to the public on the major airwaves are the ones who really suck..
I'm sure there's good new music in all eras to seek out..... it's just not going to be shoved in your face as it once was...
By 1968, when he turned 22, Webb had written By the Time I Get to Phoenix, MacArthur Park, Up Up and Away, and The Worst that Could Happen, among others. His commercial success as a songwriter at such an early age is possibly unmatched, except by Carole King.
The gatekeepers are probably the largest component to this, as artists have adjusted to what the gatekeepers are telling them will bring revenue, so as long as the same bland musical formula keeps working, they'll milk it for everything it has.
You're right about producers. I'm currently going through a mild Berlin / Bowie obsession (will we ever see an artist like him again?) and I came across this Visconti video that tells the story of the making of "Heroes" Just amazing.
There's 'old' and then there's 'getting old'.
You can really get some perspective on the hits and misses if you actually look at the weekly Top 100 charts from the 60's, 70's and even right up to today - For every big, memorable hit, the rest of those charts were filled with crappy music that never amounted to much more than a blip on the radar.
There will always be LOTS of bad music...
Look at the charts from this week in 1965, and see how many of these songs and artists have become "classics".
Who remembers #20, "Twine Time" by Alvin Cash and the Crawlers?
It's the record companies and MSM that suck, they promote the worst and start the trends the mindless sheep follow. While there is still good music being created out there it's not offered to you on a plate like the sub par stuff that YouTube and the Media, Movies etc try to push on you.
Neil Sedaka was 22 in 1963, and had written most of the stuff you'd know by then. For himself and others. That Brill building crew was a pretty young bunch.
Tom pettty.. last DJ encapsulates the whole thing...we do that song and it's great fun sing it with a snarl.
That's what I do with this one
There is a misleading and disingenuous proposal trotted out every time this discussion rears it's ugly head. That is the suggestion that every generation has it's comfort-zone music, and the music of the new generation will be subjectively interpreted as worse because it is new and different. You can Google the Simpson's reference from an episode where "Grandpa" says, "I used to be 'with it', but they changed what 'it' is ... etc." What is left out of such an analogy (that every generation finds the kid's modern music jarring and unmusical) is that ... as time marches on, so does technology and societal structural dysfunctions. The society of today is fundamentally different that previous iterations in ways that invalidate analogous parallels with previously existing societies and their Art and popular entertainment.
Technology has reached a tipping point. It has passed the point where our lives are safer and daily living is more convenient because of technology (the 50s' view of a modern future), and we've become a society that depends on constant technology-based input from devices ... our computer phones ... we've become addicted to technology. That addiction has spawned a different kind of "artistic" expression, IMO. As far as I am able to tell, the popular music of the past fifteen or twenty years (a generation's worth) is fundamentally different due to the influence of this addiction to technological devices.
It's a complete waste of time to rinse and repeat the cliche that every generation will largely disavow the "new" popular music, so history repeats itself. You can believe that if you like, it is a "red herring". If there is a meaningful discussion about the Art of new and current Music or about the structure and content of Current Popular Music, it should take our unprecedented technological conditions ... (namely, we are addicted to and to an extent, arguably controlled by, our personal computers), into account.
The only analogy to previous generations I see is that the generation raised in front of the TV during the 60s and 70s were a ominous preview of the current conditions.
I'm so old and set in my ways, I can't even agree that some of today's music actually qualifies as music, and I wouldn't listen to it, if someone actually convinced me that it is.
Then again back in the day, they used to give you a citation for spitting on the sidewalk. I don't know what they would have done to people that do the things they do on sidewalks today.
Netflix has a few documentaries on the rise of DJs and EDM from the club scene in NY and other cities. How it went from guys
spinning vinyl in new ways to creating their own dance music on laptops using DAWs,
hardware and software synths, drum machines, etc. It's easy to crap on DJs if you don't know what they really do.
It's easy to say that "the industry is feeding the sheep", but I don't really agree. A lot of the DJ music is
extremely simple, harmonically, but since when have the masses ever wanted harmonic complexity? Not since
the days of Broadway and Duke Ellington, I think.
DJs/EDM have had a heavy influence on so much music, whether on stage, in movies,
on TV shows, TV commercials, etc. Why? Cause it's catchy and makes people move. Before you people disrespect DJs
I suggest they study up on them a little bit first. If people still disrespect them, that's fine-- at least it's based on
knowledge rather than ignorance.
Here's an example of a song conceived, written, and produced by Avicii. You might like it, you might hate it, but it has over
548M views on YouTube. If you listen to it, it's a pop song, nothing more, nothing less, with a driving beat. To me it doesn't matter
if he can't physically play a musical instrument. He took the music he heard in his head and turned it into music people can hear.
Doesn't matter if it's by playing guitar, using samples, using synths--- whatever. It's music. You could take the same song and
re-orchestrate it for traditional instruments. At the end of the day it's the composer that matters, and the composer that I can respect,
just as I respect Mozart and Beethoven for what they composed, not for how well they played the piano.
Even the DJs themselves were amazed that people would be willing to fill up a stadium just to watch them up on stage essentially
put a thumb drive into a laptop, hit play so that their setlist would play, and then dance along with everybody. But it turns out
that watching the composer up there, waving at the crowd, with a great light show, was a satisfactory visual spectacle to the audience.
Given how boring a lot of traditional bands can be on stage, is it really that great of a surprise? Some of them do things to the music
as it's playing-- run it through a Moog filter, turn the beats up and down a bit....but many of them just hit play.
The whole rise of underground raves to big, sanctioned festivals was also not something driven by "the industry". These guys did it themselves,
on the cheap, and it grew by leaps and bounds. Like the Grateful Dead, in a way. People craved the ability to gather in large crowds and
dance together (many taking Ecstasy, it's true). The traditional music industry never saw it coming. Once it took off of
course they got on board. But the rise of EDM was a completely organic thing, not at all a matter of the industry feeding the sheep.
Like any genre, it has split into a variety of sub-genres. There are arguments over what is good, what isn't, who's a poser, etc. So like any
genre some of it is better than others, but that mostly depends on your individual taste. I really like most of what the Crystal Method does,
for example, but that's just me. I think their use of synthesizers is quite progressive compared to their predecessors.
OP....I'm soooo glad someone else said it! BIG +1
I am another old fart who hates almost all new popular music, but even more than that I hate the old farts who whinge about the youth these days, corporate greed, etc. etc. - you really think it was any different back in your (our) day?
Here are a couple of young and kinda-famous bands in different genres. Give them a listen and tell me it isn't, basically, good creative music with nods to tradition. The industry has just changed so much you have to look for the good stuff in different ways and places.