Unsung Forum » a feeling : no really new music can be recorded any more. |
Log In to post a reply
|
|
|
Topic View: Flat | Threaded |
IanB 6761 posts |
Edited Aug 30, 2008, 15:38
Aug 30, 2008, 15:34
|
||
dave clarkson wrote: Yeah I'm guilty of that one. What's it's done for me though is have a bad effect. I'm sick to death of music in general and feel saturated to the point where nothing musically excites me anymore. I'm very much with you on that. I listen to everything I buy, find or get given but according to iTunes it would take me 208 days (presumably without sleep) to listen to everything I own including spoken word. When I joined the move towards digital in 2002 and loaded up my cds on to my hard drive I had a about a tad over a quarter of that. So in six years I've quadrupled a collection that had taken decades to build. A lot of it live recordings and radio plays etc but still. That's a crazy amount to get a handle on. Every day I find myself starting off with good intentions and then part of a tune or a riff or a vocal inflection will remind me of another artist or album and I'm off. Just this am I went from Lisa Gerrard to This Mortal Coil to Chris Bell to Cheap Trick to Big Star to Matthew Sweet to Richard Hell in less than an hour. It's like a game of aural six degrees of separation on fast forward. And I'm doing all this while working so I am not really listening at all. There is something in me that craves a return to having 400 or 500 great vinyl lps across the genres, binning off the cds and digital. Digital is great for spoken word and for bootlegs but I feel that I need to get back to some serious listening. And that either requires a narrower focus or the kind of discipline as a listener that I simply don't have.
|
|||
zphage 3378 posts |
Edited Aug 30, 2008, 17:27
Aug 30, 2008, 16:37
|
||
IanB wrote: dave clarkson wrote: Yeah I'm guilty of that one. What's it's done for me though is have a bad effect. I'm sick to death of music in general and feel saturated to the point where nothing musically excites me anymore. I'm very much with you on that. I listen to everything I buy, find or get given but according to iTunes it would take me 208 days (presumably without sleep) to listen to everything I own including spoken word. When I joined the move towards digital in 2002 and loaded up my cds on to my hard drive I had a about a tad over a quarter of that. So in six years I've quadrupled a collection that had taken decades to build. A lot of it live recordings and radio plays etc but still. That's a crazy amount to get a handle on. Every day I find myself starting off with good intentions and then part of a tune or a riff or a vocal inflection will remind me of another artist or album and I'm off. Just this am I went from Lisa Gerrard to This Mortal Coil to Chris Bell to Cheap Trick to Big Star to Matthew Sweet to Richard Hell in less than an hour. It's like a game of aural six degrees of separation on fast forward. And I'm doing all this while working so I am not really listening at all. There is something in me that craves a return to having 400 or 500 great vinyl lps across the genres, binning off the cds and digital. Digital is great for spoken word and for bootlegs but I feel that I need to get back to some serious listening. And that either requires a narrower focus or the kind of discipline as a listener that I simply don't have. That's why it's great to a have a few Holy Grails just out of reach, holds back music from being totally commodified.
|
|||
keith a 9570 posts |
Aug 30, 2008, 17:22
|
||
Dog 3000 wrote: maybe that's the thing right there -- "punk" severed popular music from musicianship, and it became more of a "star system." 1. "Punk" didn't severe popular music from musicianship. Loads of 'punk' bands had members who were good musicians. It was more a reaction against the likes of ELP and Yes where the contents seemed to be more about musicians abilty than the actual music. 2. There was a star system waaaay before punk. 'Punk' was surely as anti-star as it ever was anti-muso. 3. How did 'punk' lead to a star system. I really don't follow. 4. Technical ability is even more over-rated than Randy Newman. Idea's are far more important than musical ability will ever be. You wouldn't say you prefer one author to another because his handwriting is neater, would you? ; )
|
|||
IanB 6761 posts |
Edited Aug 30, 2008, 21:44
Aug 30, 2008, 21:43
|
||
keith a wrote: Dog 3000 wrote: maybe that's the thing right there -- "punk" severed popular music from musicianship, and it became more of a "star system." 1. "Punk" didn't severe popular music from musicianship. Loads of 'punk' bands had members who were good musicians. It was more a reaction against the likes of ELP and Yes where the contents seemed to be more about musicians abilty than the actual music. 2. There was a star system waaaay before punk. 'Punk' was surely as anti-star as it ever was anti-muso. 3. How did 'punk' lead to a star system. I really don't follow. 4. Technical ability is even more over-rated than Randy Newman. Idea's are far more important than musical ability will ever be. You wouldn't say you prefer one author to another because his handwriting is neater, would you? ; ) Agree on 1. Lots of great players ended up in punk bands because they came out of that Pub Rock / Bar Band culture. Playing covers is one surefire way to learn your instrument inside out. Ask Paul Weller. Or rather don't bother, he's boring. 2 & 3 Punk ended up being about personalities because the musicians couldn't carry the burden of expectation. Most of the recorded output of British 1st and 2nd generation British Punk bands was utter cack. "Damned Damned Damned", "The Clash", the first four Pistols singles and much of "Bollocks" - all utterly brilliant. And er ... not a lot else in terms of albums. Lots of great singles in a Nuggets / Pebbles kind-of-a-way but very little evidence of extended creativity unless you count Art Rockers like Wire and Pop Group and Go4. But they were not Punk. Not like UK Subs. Not like CRASS. 4 Can could play, Magic Band could play, Blockheads could play, Cheap Trick could play, Television could play, Pere Ubu could play. The list is endelss and none of them could have made the music they made without being able to play. Virtually anyone with a career stretching beyond one album can play. Being able to play should be the minimum requirement. Taste is the key issue not techncial facility but learning to play gives you choices that the whole monkey-with-typewriter thing does not. That's exactly is what got lost in the shuffle when Peel was championing all those no talent, can't sing, can't play, can't write indie acts in the early 80s. A monkey with a Telecaster could get in the Festive 50 circa 1984. That monkey is not going to come up with "Last Train To Clarksville" It's like everyone took the most reductive and easily Xeroxed aspects of The Velvets, The Fall or The Smiths tried to make a career out of it without having an iota of the intelligence or charisma. As the classic heckle of the time goes "practice at home". If only they had.
|
|||
zphage 3378 posts |
Aug 30, 2008, 22:45
|
||
For every Ruts there was dreck like UK Subs, Lurkers, Chron Gen, Exploited, etc one idea, a few notes American hardcore definitely severed playing from ability. 76-84 were peak years, alot of variety, still tethered to rock'n'roll then calcification/convenience: the silliness of goth, electropop, SAW, industrial, smiths, C86, gated reverb, keyboard bass instead of real: all areas of lessening ability
|
|||
Dog 3000 4611 posts |
Edited Aug 30, 2008, 23:56
Aug 30, 2008, 23:54
|
||
I think Stockhausen was doing a lot of that wave-building stuff and sample-distorting way back in the 50's & 60's though. The difference is, it took years doing a piece by hand with tone generators, magnetic tape and a razor blade! On a certain level, I think he's already taken the "science of sound" approach to music as deep as it can go. Though of course, as you indicate the possibilities of this approach are "free" to the point of being pretty much infinite (limited only by imagination and the range of sounds that can be heard by the human ear), so obviously there's plenty of territory left to explore! I have been messing around with Reason software recently, which basically emulates a whole bunch of classic analog gizmos. My problem is always figuring out where to start! Literally, there's too many possiblities . . . ! PS - I bet you'd find this book a really interesting read: http://www.amazon.com/Stockhausen-Music-Karlheinz/dp/0714529184
|
|||
Dog 3000 4611 posts |
Edited Aug 31, 2008, 00:23
Aug 31, 2008, 00:21
|
||
PMM wrote: Who knows what the next few years will bring in terms of technology? What kind of music, for example, would a device harnessing brainwaves and converting them into sound, make? Indeed! I think it was Arthur C. Clarke who said "any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic". We can't even imagine the "magical" sounds of things that don't exist yet! Though I do wonder if "recorded music" (or even "songs") will be as important as they were in the last century . . . everything seems to be going towards "more user control". Instead of "just listening" to music, maybe people will be able to "play music" the way they would "play a video game" today . . . ("Guitar Hero" anyone?! Just imagine if this game didn't just recycle old Aerosmith songs, if it actually let you create new music in a super-easy, intuitive way?)
|
|||
keith a 9570 posts |
Aug 31, 2008, 00:46
|
||
zphage wrote: then calcification/convenience: the silliness of goth, electropop, SAW, industrial, smiths, C86, gated reverb, keyboard bass instead of real: all areas of lessening ability Rubbish. There's load of ability there. And I don't just mean Johnny Marr's guitar playing, though if we all just just cared about musicianship, then we'd all sit at home and listen to John Williams LP's all day. That's why I think there's more to music than musicianship. TBH I prefer SAW's way with a tune to Keith Emerson's Piano Improvisations any day.
|
|||
zphage 3378 posts |
Edited Aug 31, 2008, 01:01
Aug 31, 2008, 00:52
|
||
keith a wrote: zphage wrote: then calcification/convenience: the silliness of goth, electropop, SAW, industrial, smiths, C86, gated reverb, keyboard bass instead of real: all areas of lessening ability Rubbish. There's load of ability there. And I don't just mean Johnny Marr's guitar playing, though if we all just just cared about musicianship, then we'd all sit at home and listen to John Williams LP's all day. That's why I think there's more to music than musicianship. TBH I prefer SAW's way with a tune to Keith Emerson's Piano Improvisations any day. I agree, Mr Emerson is a very gracious host with great stories, but I am not much of a progster or fusioneer. Give me Muscle Shoals, Fame, or American studios anyday over fops in makeup prattling about their cat, playing one fingered keyboard. Here's the irony most of the progster/fusioneers played as studio musicians on classic tunes, but most of your 80's onward players could never.
|
|||
keith a 9570 posts |
Aug 31, 2008, 01:12
|
||
IanB wrote: Lots of great singles in a Nuggets / Pebbles kind-of-a-way but very little evidence of extended creativity unless you count Art Rockers like Wire and Pop Group and Go4. But they were not Punk. I don't see that as a problem personally. The art of making great 45's is an under-rated one IMO. I don't see why albums are seen as some great Holy Grail and singles their poor relation. The Lines releasing one classic single (White Night) makes them far more important than some shit albums band like Rush as far as I'm concerned. But yeah, it's all opinion! IanB wrote: 4 Can could play, Magic Band could play, Blockheads could play, Cheap Trick could play, Television could play, Pere Ubu could play. The list is endelss and none of them could have made the music they made without being able to play. Virtually anyone with a career stretching beyond one album can play. Being able to play should be the minimum requirement. I wasn't suggesting people shouldn't be able to play, which is why I used the term 'technical ability'. Is Keith Levine a 'better' guitarist technically than Clapton? I sincerely doubt it, but I know who I'd rather listen to! Actually Can are perhaps the best example of what musicianship should be. These are guys who can clearly play, but do they need to ram the point home? No! You don't get Karoli imdulging in some pointless, mindless fretwank. They let their music do the talking, not their musicianship. IanB wrote: Taste is the key issue not techncial facility but learning to play gives you choices that the whole monkey-with-typewriter thing does not. Maybe, but it also makes a lot of musicians make *bad* choices. IanB wrote: That's exactly is what got lost in the shuffle when Peel was championing all those no talent, can't sing, can't play, can't write indie acts in the early 80s. A monkey with a Telecaster could get in the Festive 50 circa 1984. I know you like a good generalisaton, Ian, but who precisely were those monkeys with a Telecaster? There were actually some very decent records in the Festive 50's circa 1984. (Adopts Lloyd Grossman voice) Let's examine the evidence... 1984... Smiths - How Soon Is Now Cocteau Twins - Pearly Dewdrops Drop The Men They Couldn't Hang - Green Fields of France Cocteau Twins - Spangle Maker The Mighty Wah - Come Back Membranes - Spike Milligans Tape Recorder New Order - Thieves Like Us Sisters of Mercy - Walk Away The Fall - Lay of the Land Redskins - Keep On Keepin' On Nick Cave and the Bad Seeds - St Huck New Order - Lonesome Tonight Billy Bragg - Between The Wars Smiths - Nowhere Fast Sisters of Mercy - Emma Cocteau Twins - Ivo Smiths - What Difference Does It Make The Fall - Creep Echo and the Bunnymen - The Killing Moon New Order - Murder This Mortal Coil - Kangaroo Cocteau Twins - Donimo Smiths - William It Was Really Nothing Smiths - Heaven Knows I'm Miserable Now Frankie Goes To Hollywood - Two Tribes Unknown Cases - Masimbabele Very Things - The Bushes Scream While My Daddy Prunes Smiths - Please Please Please Let Me Get What I Want Billy Bragg - The Saturday Boy The Cult - Spiritwalker Propoganda - Dr Mabuse Yeah Yeah No - Biased Binding This Mortal Coil - Another Day Berntholer - My Suiter Robert Wyatt - Biko Smiths - Reel Around The Fountain Jesus and Mary Chain - Upside Down Cocteau Twins - Pandora Flesh For Lulu - Subteraneans Cocteau Twins - Beatrix Special AKA - Nelson Mandela Frank Chickens - Blue Canary New Model Army - Vengence The Fall - No Bulbs Pogues - Dark Streets of London Hard Corps - Dirty Echo and the Bunnymen - Thorn of Crowns Bronski Beat - Small Town Boy Cocteau Twins - Pepper Tree Working Week - Venceramos I probably like 40% of that list! IanB wrote: It's like everyone took the most reductive and easily Xeroxed aspects of The Velvets, The Fall or The Smiths tried to make a career out of it without having an iota of the intelligence or charisma. As the classic heckle of the time goes "practice at home". If only they had. You'll always get people who copy, whatever the genre. And TBH I'd prefer someone to copy The Velvets than most other bands!
|
Pages: 12 – [ Previous | 1 … 5 6 7 8 9 10 | Next ] | Add a reply to this topic |
|
|
Unsung Forum Index |