|
Register | Blogging | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
02-26-2010, 12:23 PM | #151 (permalink) | |
Account Disabled
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 4,538
|
Quote:
Something doesn't have to be acoustic to be "real". It's about the sound of the music, not how the music was made (most of the time... Opera or other genres that pride themselves on the vocal talent of a person). Pop music isn't about whether or not they can really sing, which by the way, most can sing... maybe not as well as it comes off on record. Last edited by someonecompletelyrandom; 02-26-2010 at 12:28 PM. |
|
02-26-2010, 02:41 PM | #153 (permalink) | |
Dr. Prunk
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Where the buffalo roam.
Posts: 12,137
|
Musical instruments are fake too, only real music comes from the body, like farts.
Quote:
I put Joy Division, The Cure, Wire, Gang of Four, Public Image Ltd and Killing Joke in the former, Ecco & The Bunneymen and Jesus and Mary Chain in the latter. I don't really have an opinion on The Fall. By far the worst band to ever come out of this movement though is The Raincoats, good holy god. Most post punk revivalism I've heard is absolutely rancid. Please, SOMEBODY STOP BRANDON FLOWERS, BEFORE HE RECORDS AGAIN!!! Last edited by boo boo; 02-26-2010 at 02:52 PM. |
|
02-26-2010, 07:11 PM | #154 (permalink) |
Please, don't feed Mrguy
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 234
|
I get sick of people in the older generation who hear a song on the radio and go "WTF? This is music? Ugh".
Personally, i hate 90+ percent of the mainstream radio crap, but they all liked the radio crap when they were young, and their parents would of said the exact same. Thankfully, i listen to a mix of old and new music so my parents don't get pissed off at it . I just hope i don't become one of those people who say "Old is good. new is crap" |
02-26-2010, 08:24 PM | #155 (permalink) | ||||||||||
carpe musicam
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Les Barricades Mystérieuses
Posts: 7,710
|
Quote:
I hate to break it to you but the whole world thinks that way, that music was better back in the day, just read these testimonies and at the end if you are not convinced, then nothing will. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Quote:
"it counts in our hearts" ?ºº? “I have nothing to offer anybody, except my own confusion.” Jack Kerouac. “If one listens to the wrong kind of music, he will become the wrong kind of person.” Aristotle. "If you tried to give Rock and Roll another name, you might call it 'Chuck Berry'." John Lennon "I look for ambiguity when I'm writing because life is ambiguous." Keith Richards |
||||||||||
02-26-2010, 08:29 PM | #156 (permalink) |
MB quadrant's JM Vincent
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 3,762
|
^
Wow, you put a lot of time into that. It doesn't change what I was arguing earlier. Everyone seems to be talking about what is popular. I challenge every person on this planet to actually take some time, do some research, and look for music a little bit deeper. You will find music that is just as good as anything you may like from an earlier decade. Please, I'm begging you to think stop thinking so narrowly. Imagine yourself in the 70's...no doubt what was popular then, in my opinion, is better than what is popular now. But there was still ****. There was still excellent excellent music no one even remembers. Either way you cut it, this argument will be true so if you were living in the 70's (or whatever decade you like the most), so you would probably be walking around saying the same stuff you are today.
__________________
Confusion will be my epitaph... |
02-26-2010, 10:08 PM | #158 (permalink) |
Music Addict
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: A State of Denial
Posts: 357
|
This is definitely an important distinction that doesn't seem to be being made much.
I mean, look at, say the Billboard charts for any given year and you'll find a hell of a lot of fluff--"Sugar, Sugar" by the Archies (1969), "Tonight's the Night" by Rod Stewart (1977), "To Sir With Love" by Lulu (1967) were all the #1 songs for their respective years--all music I'd wager that contemporary people complained about the same way we're all bitching now. And a large quantity of music considered the creme of the crop of their era was essentially unnoticed by popular consciousness at the time. I've said it before and I'll say it again, the past dozen or so years have radically shifted the way music is released and absorbed, as well. There's SO MUCH out there now, so much easy access to such a mind-bending array of different musical ideas, that any generalization about the state of modern music, especially to bemoan it for a lack of... well, frankly, anything... just seems like laziness. And not just laziness, but laziness attempting to justify itself with a comfortable elitism. I wouldn't get on such a high horse about that, except that that kind of negativity in an artistic community makes it that much harder for that community to thrive. If one assumes that good music (however one defines that) isn't being produced, it's that much more unlikely one will find it when it is, that music doesn't get supported and ultimately either flounders, continues to live in obscurity or changes into something else, leading to more people bitching about it not being out there. End
__________________
Like carnivores to carnal pleasures, so were we to desperate measures... |
02-26-2010, 10:12 PM | #160 (permalink) |
Music Addict
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: A State of Denial
Posts: 357
|
I actually like that one quite a lot too (actually I kinda like all 3 of the songs I mentioned). But my point about it stands.
__________________
Like carnivores to carnal pleasures, so were we to desperate measures... |
|