MUSIC - "I weep for the future"... (1 Viewer)

number6horse

number6horse

okyoutwopixiesoutyougo
I know that everything comes from somewhere else
and that includes art... but...

At the risk of sounding like an aggrieved senior citizen (which I am give or take 20 years)... I just had to make both a specific and general comment on modern music. I just finished watching a band called Bang Camaro on the Conan O'Brien show. This band consisted of a mediocre Flying-V lead guitarist plus an screaming all-male chorus of black T-shirted dudes going "Hell yeah/par-TEE/damn right, and the usual back-up posers who look cool on television.

WTF has happened to even the pretense of trying to be original ?
Or even trying to book an original band on TV shows like Conan ?

I get the ugly feeling that rock and roll has slipped into cannibalism for good.
Even college radio is full of winking art-school "satirists". And supposedly that is where the NEXT BIG THING is.
Where is the modern Iggy ?
What suburb is today's Paul Westerberg escaping right now ?
And why did he try to kiss Joan Jett and turn her lesbian ?!?!?!!

Who has a pulse ? Because I am thinking that
technology has tamed every last one of us and
the media is starting to numb me in brand new ways.

Artistically as well as Politically.
And you ?
 
Those Bang Camaro guys are from my hometown Boston and yes, they are silly. I had an imaginary band with real people back in Boston called Bass Camaro that consisted only of bass players.

Don't hold your breathe on hearing any originality in rock anymore. It's passed into the history books along with blues and jazz.
 
Wish I had a flying V...not one of the Dean's either...the REAL thing.

The music parallels the other arts...there so much out there you cant find the good stuff...I imagine its there, but no one else will be able to find them either...so the next Paul Westerberg will only be existing on Myspace Music. 6 songs in an ocean, with 42 friends.
 
scribbler said:
[...] there so much out there you cant find the good stuff...I imagine its there, but no one else will be able to find them either...so the next Paul Westerberg will only be existing on Myspace Music. 6 songs in an ocean, with 42 friends.
Click to expand...

So true.
Still, these guys seem promising enough though: Fleet Foxes And they've been hyped up quite a bit...
 
Check out 1, Rachid Taha (song Barra Barra and others) and 2,The Hold Steady (Positive Jam and otheres) for IMHO interesting and original music.
 
Scribbler - You make a good point. The good stuff has to be sought out and its no surprise to find a 100-1 ratio of bad to good. I guess its the cannibalism of the bad bands that pisses me off. Bang Camaro was a poor rip-off of Motorhead and you can see direct influences(theft) in other shit bands too. Pure originality is rare I know, but can't these guys try harder ?

Well, no - because I don't think the audience knows any better these days.
 
Much like Ivory Soap; everything today comes branded and in a box. Gets tested, etc. When MTV came out, I dug it; now it's not the same beast. So I blame part of it on MTV. Because good looks sell, quick moves with a beat sell; bullshit sells. And record companies, trying to survive, want to sell. : (
 
Yes, the lives of discerning and adventurous listeners has become more difficult than ever. Most of what is available, as new music goes, has been considered "viable" by the entities that let it out. Most of THAT wont be very challenging...because its not meant to be. And if a good band, with some balls and some life DOES actually manage to get a "deal" - they will likely be fed through the extruder and digitally remodeled into a soilent green version of what they once were.

The only hope...go out hunting, see them live, search the websites, by the CDs they've pressed in their own basements, those shitty recordings that celebrate their tube amps and their own real voices (as opposed to the rectified and tripled ones).

Major labels, the sweat is left out (because somebody thinks it smells).
 
The truth is that times have changed and record labels (I know I sound like I'm 100), are really seeing the beginning of the end. How many people actually buy music anymore? If they do buy a CD, many of them buy it and then burn it and lend it to friends to burn. Otherwise, they burn it and then sell the CD.

Once music fails to be big business, you'll see the golden children go away and they will be replaced by people who love to make music.

It could be idealistic, and I know that people have predicted the demise of the recording industry for decades, but when it gets to the point that 1 in 10 people pay for music, then there will be not much financial reason for doing it.

Bill
 
bospress.net said:
... then there will be not much financial reason for doing it.
Click to expand...

Yep--like Bill says. It'll be left to those absolutely driven--haunted even--to simply make great, uncompromising music...

...instead of bored, suburb twaddlers full of Costco-angst & hooey.

People that MUST make music instead of those that just figure it's a decent way to gather coin & trim.
 
bospress.net said:
...How many people actually buy music anymore? If they do buy a CD, many of them buy it and then burn it and lend it to friends to burn. Otherwise, they burn it and then sell the CD...
Click to expand...

I still do. But mostly old stuff I can't find in my collection. To your point, my son has NEVER bought a cd. Everything on iTunes. Amazing. What fun is that, though? He can't blast the shit he listens to annoy the fuck out of me?

And yes, Pessimist, MTV deserves nothing nowadaze. Pimp my ride, Cribs, and all that other bullshit. I remember when young filmmakers were doing things never done before, and the big studios stood up and took notice. It spawned a new wave of creativity in film and commercial making. Now, it's, well, you said it better than I could...

Pax,

homeless mind
 
Music isn't dead...


think about this:

We're all sitting here, and i PRESUME (gulp) that a lot of folks here write their own poetry and stuff? If i was to ask someone what did they think of modern writing it would be similar to what your saying re: music: "its been ruined", "where are the new Bukowskis etc etc...". Whereas we KNOW this is not the case.

Look at BOS press? I didnt know till about 4 hours ago that such a small could have been started so recently. I always thought writings were all through big publishers, big printers, BIG BUSINESS....we won't be able to catch the 'new Bukowksis' (apologies for using such a term) until they write and write and fail and finally deliver something....

most genius happens in retrospect does it not?

so.....

Music...on the outside it looks fucked....but i'm a musician...I'm playinig gigs...I'm constantly meeting and seeing new guys, new UNHEARD of guys...any country there are amazing musicians and amazing bands to be heard...example: I was in Berlin there a few months ago. I stubbed a cigarette and walked into a bar: The Jazz band that got up on stage were absolutely amazing- original, talented, catchy, just plain-fucking-out-there, damn good....

i truly do believe genius can mostly only be recognised in retrospect...(of course there are exceptions...but that's a slightly different thing i believe)
 
bospress.net said:
The truth is that times have changed and record labels (I know I sound like I'm 100), are really seeing the beginning of the end. How many people actually buy music anymore? If they do buy a CD, many of them buy it and then burn it and lend it to friends to burn. Otherwise, they burn it and then sell the CD.

Once music fails to be big business, you'll see the golden children go away and they will be replaced by people who love to make music.

It could be idealistic, and I know that people have predicted the demise of the recording industry for decades, but when it gets to the point that 1 in 10 people pay for music, then there will be not much financial reason for doing it.
Click to expand...

The times are always changing. Here in the UK we've had to put up with over inflated CD prices since the early 80s which have only recently dropped to more realistic prices. We've had big record companies claiming that the illegal downloading of music was going to kill music and now that the industry has started to embrace the technology we have stories like this : Downloads boost 2008 single sales. Unfortunately, I'm know I'm getting old because all these modern bands sound the same, so I'm not buying any music at the moment :p Unless its somehow connected to a TV talent show, of course.

Remember this?
tape.jpg


Well looks like good news re DRM and iTunes huh? Its a start.
 
Koya, You're very right, but you're also IN it, AMONGST it PART of it perhaps...regarding current music. You are advantaged. We who are not out there in the music trenches must rely upon the tentacles of other peoples' druthers. And, theres nothing like a live show...even if the band is only decent. The "there-ness" of the experience will energize enthusiasms that would be hard-gained by just listening to a recording. Sometimes a band is good live, but NOT very good otherwise.

Cynicism keeps everything in check...and usually with some wit. So If proclamations about the ruination any art form abound...I'll usually concur. Pesimism, on the other hand is another animal...

"Genius" is a dead term; not at all reserved for exceptional efforts of any kind, anymore.
 
Technology will not kill music. It will kill corporate music. Unless they can sell it as a commercial, there will not be much money in it.

Since before we had a language we have had music.As long as people love making it and people love hearing it, there will be music (and poetry).

Bill
 
number6horse said:
I know that everything comes from somewhere else
and that includes art... but...

At the risk of sounding like an aggrieved senior citizen (which I am give or take 20 years)... I just had to make both a specific and general comment on modern music. I just finished watching a band called Bang Camaro on the Conan O'Brien show. This band consisted of a mediocre Flying-V lead guitarist plus an screaming all-male chorus of black T-shirted dudes going "Hell yeah/par-TEE/damn right, and the usual back-up posers who look cool on television.

WTF has happened to even the pretense of trying to be original ?
Or even trying to book an original band on TV shows like Conan ?

I get the ugly feeling that rock and roll has slipped into cannibalism for good.
Even college radio is full of winking art-school "satirists". And supposedly that is where the NEXT BIG THING is.
Where is the modern Iggy ?
What suburb is today's Paul Westerberg escaping right now ?
And why did he try to kiss Joan Jett and turn her lesbian ?!?!?!!

Who has a pulse ? Because I am thinking that
technology has tamed every last one of us and
the media is starting to numb me in brand new ways.

Artistically as well as Politically.
And you ?
Click to expand...

There's plenty of interesting and challenging music out there. Methinks you're not looking hard enough. Though the problem (and what a great problem it is) is that there is too much new music available to us, so in that sense the quality filter is perhaps not as effective as it was in the past.
 
Well, I'll contradict myself, which is normal. There must be good music out there, maybe even great. But I was rather spoiled growing up, turning on AM radio and listening to new releases by The Doors or The Beachboys, Janis, Jimi, Deep Purple, etc.

Then along came FM radio, and bang, it was another remarkable explosion. And the music went hand in hand with said explosion. Sure, music and its quality has ebbed and flowed over the years, and as I said previously here, MTV came along, infusing a whole new genre of music -- while also bringing out a bunch of the classics never seen before, other than live. That was cool beans.

But now, everything seems to be so dang packaged. Comb your hair, put on make-up, say the right thing, etc., etc. So while there must be good/great music being produced out there, too many hands are probably stirring the pot.

And by the time it gets to myspace or iTunes, there's a better than average chance it will be diluted from its original form. The music biz has lost its ability to take a risk.

And kids today are so tech-savvy, media-savvy, and just plain live in a point-and-click world, that if it doesn't work right away, the channel, site, song is switched -- because there are 500 more (fill in media here) at their fingertips.

I long for the days of waiting for an album to be released. The anticipation... Then to pick it up at the local record store where the burnouts worked, check out the cover, open the fucker, read what's inside, see if there is a poster, and put my scratchy sounding needle on it, knowing it would be taking a beating for my listening pleasure. Until I scratched the fucker and ruined a good song or two...

What's more, buying an album, unlike iTunes, where you purchase a song or two you like, usually had the buyer listening to the entire album. Some of my fave songs are ones that never made the air waves. I don't think that happens today, and some gems are probably lost in the Ipod shuffle.

Time for me to turn down the volume here.

Pax,

homeless mind
 
number6horse said:
WTF has happened to even the pretense of trying to be original ?
Or even trying to book an original band on TV shows like Conan ?
Click to expand...
As far as the booking of bands on network television shows goes, they are now all bands that have new releases on labels that are under the same corporate umbrella as the network. So, they are in-house commercials. Letterman, back in the day, and Conan, up until a few years ago, would book random bands, but that doesn't happen anymore.
 
scribbler said:
Koya, You're very right, but you're also IN it, AMONGST it PART of it perhaps...regarding current music. You are advantaged. We who are not out there in the music trenches must rely upon the tentacles of other peoples' druthers. And, theres nothing like a live show...even if the band is only decent. The "there-ness" of the experience will energize enthusiasms that would be hard-gained by just listening to a recording. Sometimes a band is good live, but NOT very good otherwise.

Cynicism keeps everything in check...and usually with some wit. So If proclamations about the ruination any art form abound...I'll usually concur. Pesimism, on the other hand is another animal...

"Genius" is a dead term; not at all reserved for exceptional efforts of any kind, anymore.
Click to expand...

a few points i guess:

You must also realise when i talk about new music...i dont talk about commercial,popular music....

recordings are all well and good, but if a band have great recordings and cant play live for shit then your in the same problem as you mentioned...which is why i also must insist that a lot of the great bands i've seen are getting really into their own recordings, production etc...most bands i know these days have either a great friend or a member of the band who'll do mixing, recording, mastering etc etc for them for free...people have started to take it into their own hands...

also...there is nothing like live shows...there is also nothing like BAD live shows...if a band are crap, a band are crap...its like saying a writer can seem good if hes at a public reading...same principal really...

I agree with your cynicism remark...i'm usually wholly cynical myself...however, when it comes to this subject i can't help but try and shine a little glimmer of hope unto it...!

and correct...genius is a dead term...however i was using it in its proper sense...
 
ROC said:
What a silly thing to say...

http://www.jimblack.com/alasnoaxis.html

amongst countless others.

Dig a bit deeper. There are thousands of young players shaping and reshaping Jazz (whatever 'Jazz' means) all over the world.
Click to expand...

I do cd reviews for a local 'zine in Boston so occasionly I do hear what you describe but these are very few with no impact on the culture. Looking at music history in America, musical styles are the most potent at the beginning and eventually get used up and are replaced by a new form. Seems to work that way in the art world, also.

The real innovators are not working in past forms they're thinking up new ones-we just have to wait.
 
Musicians don't operate within a vacuum and when someone makes music that has a spark of freshness about it, it does have an impact on the culture.
It is true that these few pioneers are playing to small audience but, these days, that is still counted in the hundreds of thousands, if not millions.

Only reviewers and critics talk in terms of 'new forms' and 'past forms'. For the musician interested in their craft it is a question of pushing forward to maintain the continuous (albeit spasmodic) progression of innovation that has occurred for hundreds of years (in western music - longer elsewhere).

Looking at music history in America, early examples of musical styles are often romanticised (particularly by critics and less adventuress listeners) but there can be no way of logically arguing the quality (or potency) of one period over another;

Louis Armstrong v Miles Davis v Dave Douglas.
Lester Young v Coltrane v Garbarek v Chris Potter
Couperin v Debussy v Messiaen v Boulez
Perotin v Bach v Mahler v Rautavaara

Many decades separate some of these names. Were any one of these innovators more potent than the others? None of them created new forms of music. They took up where there predecessors left off.

I've found that people who prefer todays popular music do think music is stagnating. That's probably because the 'styles' involved are full of adolescent masturbation fantasies barely sublimated into their poorly conceived (and even more poorly executed) musical expressions. Not to mention the all encompassing financial motivations.

No slimedog, I refuse to wait until someone tells me what is good (or 'legitimate'). I'd rather listen and make that judgement for myself.

It would be nice if people stopped trying to categorise and pigeon-hole music and just accepted it as the organisation of sound by humans... well, poorly and everything in between.

Crazy stuff, I know.
 
I don't think I disagree with anything you say ROC expect for maybe that Armstrong, Davis & Coltrane were truly innovative. I think my point is that at one time styles like blues or jazz were truly "cutting edge" music and drew musicians who had the desire and talent to do so. I think that today it draws musicans that are a little more conservative. And that's not a bad thing because as you pointed out music is a continous thing that is more expressive than creative.

If you look at the history of music in the world it is very tied to ritual and very central to the area it comes from. I think it would be better if it was like before with each region having it's own music and musicians and not relying on the mass market of "stars" but I guess that's another story.

In my life time I grew up with the original punk bands and though I write about support and very much enjoy new local punk bands I know they're not of the same ilk as their ancestors (ha,ha) and they don't need to be-but I know out there someone's inventing something new.

And I guess I'm a musician more than a critic as I get payed for the later (ha,ha). Zappa said writing about music is like dancing about architecture. Critics have their role, I'm reading an interesting book Flowers in the Dustbin by James Miller right now.
 
mjp said:
As far as the booking of bands on network television shows goes, they are now all bands that have new releases on labels that are under the same corporate umbrella as the network. So, they are in-house commercials. Letterman, back in the day, and Conan, up until a few years ago, would book random bands, but that doesn't happen anymore.
Click to expand...

something very rare happened last night. an independent band played on SNL.

EDIT: it's not as rare as I thought. I checked SNL's musical guests from the past few years, and there have been a few artists appearing that are signed to an independent label (mostly sub pop).
 
Too bad they were such a shitty band.

Had I just heard the first song (and only the first song) and not seen them, I might have said, "oh - what?" which is a good thing. But seeing them blew any positive impression I could have possibly come away with.

Sorry, the singer needs a kick in the nuts. Comb your hair, jackass. The "Oh look, I am so above anything as dumb as a network TV show that I still have bed hair!" pose is so pretentious and calculated that I wanted to reach through the television and bitch slap him. Especially since I'm 99% sure that a well paid professional stylist did that at his request.

And the second song, if we're just talking about music, was nothing. Kind of a nonexistent hum, like a Sting or Lionel Ritchie song. It starts - you hear instruments and singing, then it stops. But between starting and stopping, nothing happens. A disturbing amount of modern music does that.

Start hum snore stop. Repeat.

SubPop must be distributed through a subsidiary of Sheinhardt Wigs. But if SNL is actually booking bands with no corporate ties to the parent company, good for them. And they should really find a new talent booker right away. If I ever saw anything interesting, unusual or unexpected on there I think I might faint. I only say that because they have a history, a hundred years ago, of throwing things up there that would make you go, "What the fuck was that?" in a good way.

Well, after I watched that last night I said to myself, "I am not going to say anything on the forum about that band. I'm not!" But it didn't take long. Maybe next time I can just calmly walk away.
 
BOOOOOOOO!!!! ;)

except for the guy asking somebody to do his hair. I agree with you there.

but otherwise, BOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!

EDIT: ok, I was trying to fix the taps in the kitchen again and I was thinking about this. not liking a band based on the music is fine. what works for one person doesn't work for another. that's human nature.

but to sort of like it but then decide you don't based on somebody's hair seems odd. you know better than I do that rock 'n' roll is image driven. the Sex Pistols had a stylist, so did the Clash. so did almost everybody that achieved some level of success.

the singer from the Fleet Foxes, when I first saw him, reminded me a bit of Kurt Cobain. now, Nirvana probably never had a stylist, but I'm sure that once Cobain discovered that he struck upon an image that resonated with people, he cultivated that image. even if he happened upon it by accident.

kurt-cobain-photo.jpg


fleet-foxes.JPG


he made sure he looked a certain way when he went onstage. he probably hated himself for minstreling for the crowd, but I have a feeling he hated himself for a lot of other reasons also. his guilt over a hairdo didn't put the shotgun to his head.

anyway, that's my mini rant. now if you'll excuse me, I have a hair appointment.
 
hoochmonkey9 said:
but to sort of like it but then decide you don't based on somebody's hair seems odd.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't disagree with that.

But I only sort of liked the one song, because they were doing some unusual close harmony vocalizing, which most groups today could not pull off, and wouldn't even try to pull off live. So I went into the second song with an open mind, but when it didn't do anything the calculated look started to grate on me.

Had they whipped out two distinctive, interesting songs I certainly wouldn't care how they look. The disdain for the look came after the realization that the first song was probably a fluke.

You might have picked a better comparison than Cobain though. I have never seen him look any other way, even in old footage of the band. I really don't think they gave it a lot of thought at first. That Foxes guy looked like he was very clean and polite and smelled nice, which made the hair seem -- less than genuine.

But yes, it's a dumb thing to judge a band on, you're right.
 
fair enough. I get it now.

I picked Cobain because I think he came upon his look naturally, like you say, but once people latched onto it he felt compelled to live up to it. but I could be wrong. but Cobain and the Foxes guy looked similar to me, and that's another reason I picked on Kurt.

and in the interest of full disclosure, I like the Fleet Foxes very much.

no shit, right?
 
Well its rock and roll, I suppose...cant talk about it without HAIRSTYLES coming into the conversation. Cant judge a damn musician by just listening.
 
And the runners up are

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Erik is Norway a magic place? That video is the winner. In the comments someone said that guy is Danish. I need to go to Europe. It must be those northern lights.
 
That's right, Kurt, the guy was Danish. He played the lamest of pop music, which was often his own. He died an alcoholic years ago at a relatively young age.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

So, this band was on SNL and mjp didn't like them? You're getting old, maaaaaan. :cool:
 

Similar threads

mjp
Future
Replies
1
Views
1K
whatsayjew
whatsayjew
mjp
Old music is outselling new music for the first time in history
Replies
5
Views
1K
nervas
nervas
mjp
Music is the weapon
Replies
1
Views
1K
skiroomalum
skiroomalum
Short Bus
Must read for fans of the industry that is music
Replies
3
Views
2K
Short Bus
Short Bus
mjp
Talented youth, bright future
Replies
17
Views
2K
mjp
mjp

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top