Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

Notes_Norton

All Access
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    20,355

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    51

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Notes_Norton

    Do The Beatles still hold up to modern music?

    in The Gibson Lounge

    Posted

    When the Beatles arrived, I was in High School. I didn't think they were bad, and I didn't think they were good either. Their covers of older songs paled in comparison to me, and the musicianship on a lot of their early stuff was mediocre. But I did appreciate some of the song structures, especially the concise B sections.

    I found the song "Help" interesting as the melody stayed pretty much on the same pitch while the chords change and the roots descended.

    Then when Rubber Soul came out, I was hooked. IMO if they got rid of half the songs on the White Album, it would have made a very good one disc album. Revolver was nice, and the Abbey Road medley was divine.

    Their last release, Let It Be showed me just how much George Martin contributed to The Beatles. IMO Phil Spector couldn't save it. Not that the album was bad, it was OK, but it didn't have the George Martin magic.

    But that's just my own personal taste coming through. If you disagree, your opinion is just as valid as mine.

    Pop music is by nature disposable.

    My dad was a Big Band Era fan. But who do we remember out of the hundreds of bands? Perhaps 10?

    We remember Sintra, Peggy Lee, and a few others.

    As the years go by, the big names fade, and the lesser names fade away. As I said, it's disposable.

    Taylor Swift, Lady Gaga, Ed Sheeran, Nicki Minaj, all have their days in the sun, but their stars will eventually fade.

    Most people love the music they grew up with the best, and if you grew up with The Kinks, Georgie Fame, Dusty Springfield, The Beatles, The Animals, Lulu, and the rest, you will probably like them until you die. Some newer music will get to you, but won't replace the music of your youth. Of course, as musicians, we should have an open mind and enjoy the music of our parents and our children too, but the music we listened to and played when we were going from childhood to adulthood will always be special.

    GenX and GenZ, and others will have their songs and stars that aren't going to be the same as the ones the Boomers grew up with.

    The music of your parents and older siblings will always be old music, and as you age, the newer music will be mostly mediocre at best, if not trashy.

    And the beat goes on (Thanks Sonny Bono)

     

    Insights and incites by Notes ♫

    • Like 1
    • Upvote 1

    Electric bass for small hands?

    in The Gibson Lounge

    Posted

    I think the Gibson SG (EB-3) bass is short scale and lightweight. So are the Fender Mustang and Hofner Violin models.

    If I wanted a short-scale for a youth, I'd probably favor the Gibson, but I'd definitely let them decide. If they like it, they will play it more and better,

     

    Insights and incites ♫

    • Like 1

    Do The Beatles still hold up to modern music?

    in The Gibson Lounge

    Posted

    4 hours ago, cody78 said:

    Similarly to the Beatles, Beethoven doesn't always grab my attention, yet the composers I just listed from the 20th century do. 

    For me, interesting classical music starts with Beethoven, not all, but especially Symphonies 3, 4 and 7. Before 3 he was still in the Mozart/Hayden mode, but like the Beatles' Rubber Soul and on, he changed music. Prokofiev, Suk, Dvorak, Shostakovitch, Tchaikovsky, Saint-Seans, and others turned out some of my favorite classical music.

    I like a lot of jazz too. I lean towards Getz, Turrentine, and Desmond as my main voice is sax, but I also like Jimmy Smith, Miles, Mingus, Kenton, Basie, Corea, Nascimento, Lins and quite a few others.

    No matter where it comes from, if it hits me the right way, I like it. And I don't know exactly why some songs turn me on, and something else similar may not. I tried to analyze that at one time, but I gave up, and just enjoy what speaks to me.

    The Beatles were never hard rock, so you can't compare them to Zeppelin, Aerosmith, or Bon Jovi. And remember, Fleetwood Mac did a lot of soft rock like Hypnotized, Over My Head, and Sentimental Lady.

    On the other hand, I'm Down, I Want You (She's So Heavy), and Revolution, may have been better choices at the concert you attended. I really like I Am The Walrus, but more for the arrangement than the musical value, and that would be difficult to pull off live.

    Since 1985, I targeted the +55-year-old audience in Florida, it's good, steady work, and I focus on my audience's desires. So I don't listen to a lot of newer music. When I do, I can't stand it if I hear auto-tune artifacts, and since I'm not a word person, rap bores me. I do hear some decent new things from time to time, but I can't always identify the artist. I've heard some Radiohead, Arctic Moneys, Foo Fighters, Pearl Jam, NIN, Van Fleet, Coldplay, and a few others that I like.

    We just learned some Jethro Tull, Fleetwood Mac, Johnny Winter, Metallica, KC & The Sunshine Band, Johnny Cash, Master KG/Nomcebo, Johnny Rivers, and Adele. They make requests, if the client is steady their requests are important, and if the same request comes from multiple audience members that will also elevate its importance.

    Since I play music for a living, what I play is chosen by the audience I targeted. It's the compromise, some say sell-out, but IMO, it's not nearly as big a sell-out as working as a wage slave 40 hours a week, so you can play art music on the weekends. https://www.nortonmusic.com/cats/songlist.html

    My audience wants memories, the music of their lives, so 30-40 year old music hits their sweet spot. 40-50 still works, and newer than 40 works because they didn't stop listening. I just have to be careful what to select. So I guess I'm not the person to ask if anything old still holds up, because that's my bread and butter.

    When it comes to recreational listening, it's everything from Muddy Waters to Prokofiev. I find songs I like in most eras and genres.

     

    Insights and incites by Notes ♫

    • Like 1
    • Upvote 1

    Do The Beatles still hold up to modern music?

    in The Gibson Lounge

    Posted

    Pop music is more of an evolution than a static thing.

    Elvis, Chuck Berry, Jerry Lee Lewis, were not far from the jump blues and boogie-woogie that preceded it. They took the music that came before and evolved it. It's not much different from a lot of Louis Jordan and Louis Prima music.

    The Beatles did the same thing. Covers of Twist And Shout, You Really Got A Hold On Me, and others showed their roots, and they took it from there. Rubber Soul marked their maturity to me and the place where they ventured pop music into evolved areas.

    Do I think some of the stars of today will be remembered? Definitely, but only time will tell which ones will last.

    Someone mentioned the Beatles used the recording studio as an instrument. Les Paul and Mary Ford did that, so did Patti Page and others, but as the recording process became more sophisticated, so did the people using it. The Beatles took full advantage of 4 tracks, and advanced the recording studio as an instrument to new levels. Technology, imagination, and don't forget George Martin who was a wizard of an engineer and music arranger.

    And what does hold up to modern music mean anyway? Music has evolved past The Beatles, in some good ways, and in some bad ways. Me? I think Count Basie and Frank Sinatra still hold up today. Not as modern music, but with much of their output, as good music.

    Some day The Beatles will be thought of the way we think of Frank Sinatra, Duke Ellington, Elvis Presley and so many others today. And sometime in the distant future, they may become just a footnote in history, no more important than Stephen Foster or Al Jolson. And that's OK. It's pop music, it's disposable, it's the voice of a generation.

    I've been playing the retirement audience here in Florida since 1985. It's a good, steady market. At first, we played Sinatra, Glenn Miller, Benny Goodman, Count Basie, Duke Ellington, Patti Page, and no rock music was allowed. The older people die off, and the younger people take their place. The first time we played a rock and roll song (Elvis) some people danced, and others had a fit. A couple of years later it was mostly early rock (pre Beatles) and when we played a standard, someone said, “You know, Harry James is dead.” Now we don't play Elvis songs very much, Beatles still work, but not as well as they did 10 years ago, and we're playing a lot of 80s rock. We also do some 2000 pop songs that appeal to the older audience.  We just play what they react to and learn more of what they are reacting to.

    All things must pass (Thanks, George)

    If you like The Beatles, enjoy them for what they are. If you don't care for them, that's OK, too. Everything isn't for everyone. Plenty of people don't like Prokofiev's music, and I think most of it is delightful.

    There are only two kinds of music, music I like and music for other people's ears.

     

    Insights and incites by Notes ♫

     

    • Like 1

    Do The Beatles still hold up to modern music?

    in The Gibson Lounge

    Posted

    Some of the Beatles' catalog bores me, and some of it thrills me. The Abbey Road Medley is sublime, while Maxwell's Silver Hammer is not interesting at all to me. A lot of their early work is simple, but often have great B parts that take you out of the tonic key for 8 bars or so in unusual and delightful ways.

    I could say the same about Queen, Led Z, Ludwig Beethoven, Fleetwood Mac, Bon Jovi, Bruno Mars, Benny Goodman, Charlie Parker, Dmitri Shostakovich, Etta James, and so many others.

    I like music from many generations, and many genres. But I don't know of many artists who can hit a proverbial home run every time.

     

    Insights and incites by Notes ♫

    • Like 1

    The New Madrid Fault Line

    in The Gibson Lounge

    Posted

    Fortunately, I don't live in an earthquake zone. Instead, we get hurricanes.

    But if I'm going to live in a zone with chances of a natural disaster, hurricanes are preferred. At least we get time to prepare for the event.

    I was in a slight earthquake in California. Unfortunately, I was driving on a rural highway when it happened, so I didn't notice it. That evening it was on the news.

     

    Notes ♫

×
×
  • Create New...