ParlourMan Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 Pretty wise and perceptive... Deep. You got the whole meat of it. Their music still sucks though, and ours was awesome. :) Challenge accepted. ;) Post a list of what's awesome and I'll tell you what's shite about it. :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Del Nilppeznaf Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 It's been proven the music that people listen to, obsess about around the ages of 15-25 will typically remain their favourite and a benchmark by which newer music is judged. What we're seeing here is the natural ageing process and harking back to favourites... nostalgia and whatnot means Another way of looking at it, maybe it's not music which has stopped being mind-blowing, but our minds which have stopped being mind-blown because we're set in our ways and preferences. Well...we have talked about this before haven't we. While you make some valid points PM, there is no getting away from the fact that the 'charts'..or the music that is really popular today..is just Sh!te !!!! its throw away culture...and simply a business model..the kids are into it because thats what they are fed bv the corporate media...who are making a killing from it. one of my pld mates has become a bvit of a SupaStar DJ/ producer,..he goes by the name Riton..check him out PM..remixes for all the big names..residency at Space Ibiza.. flying around the world Djing..the works i used to DJ with him..and even used to produce stuff together..when we were but kids... but I have NO interest in making that music...and I just couldn't picture myself DJing in a feckin nightclub at age 50....or listening to that music on a regular basis where as playing real instruments and making shall we say traditional music..is timeless... the examples I gave above prove that great music is still being made by young people... but the crap you mention is simply CRAP ;P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MorrisrownSal Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 PM Teasing of course. I have songs that were horrible that mean so much to me. Who doesn't remember, and still love, an old song that brings back the memory of a girl, or how you felt when she broke up with you, or a good time had with a core group of friends... I could bring up corny Hall and Oates tunes, Eagles, Steve Miller Band, and Supertramp... and even Van Halen's Jamie's Cryin... Many of you would laugh hard, as certainly my kids do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blindboygrunt Posted October 1, 2013 Author Share Posted October 1, 2013 This was never meant to be a 'better in my day' argument.... Wasn't even meant to be an argument ... Today's music is not all rubbish... If Justin bieber's music speaks to some kid the way my music spoke to me then fine. And it must be. I refuse to hear an argument that says nothing good is happening these days. . its there if you look. But you ain't gonna find it with the main radio stations playing in the house. I'm just wondering if its possible for someone to blow my mind again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParlourMan Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 there is no getting away from the fact that the 'charts'..or the music that is really popular today..is just Sh!te !!!! I mightn't disagree with you on a lot of it, but it's still subjective. A kid telling you your music is shite is every bit as valid as us telling him his music is shite. THere is no right/wrong here without reducing (ye like that one?) down to a snobby my taste is better than your taste scenario. its throw away culture...and simply a business model..the kids are into it because thats what they are fed bv the corporate media...who are making a killing from it. Very same could be said about merseybeat and the brit invasion based on the Beatles popularity... it's how scenes are born. I seem to recall everyone was making more than the stones etc... so the business model hasn't changed that much. It was crooks then, it's crooks now. Clarify yer point, caller...... ;) one of my pld mates has become a bvit of a SupaStar DJ/ producer,..he goes by the name Riton..check him out PM..remixes for all the big names..residency at Space Ibiza.. flying around the world Djing..the works. i used to DJ with him..and even used to produce stuff together..when we were but kids... but I have NO interest in making that music...and I just couldn't picture myself DJing in a feckin nightclub at age 50....or listening to that music on a regular basis That's personal choice though, it's not a valida\tion of being correct. where as playing real instruments and making shall we say traditional music..is timeless... the examples I gave above prove that great music is still being made by young people... but the crap you mention is simply CRAP ;P Guitar music is dead Mr Epstien.......... very famous words those. The music is not timeless, as much sickening junk has been made, produced and released with 'real' instruments as with anything electronic. What's timeless is someone making an artistic piece of work which connects, be it for depth, be it for virtuosity, be it just for pure rock n roll spirit. Music in general and priducers especially can cover all manner of weak spots etc.. what they cant do is make something sound like they mean it when they dont. That's the difference no matter what the musical medium, you can always hear the folk that mean it, the rest of the charts no matter what the era is just filled up with the extra passengers. The quicker older folk accept they're not 'right' but just strongly opinionated the less frustrated they will be. And lets be honest, there's nothing quite as ironic and amusing as some old white dude with a strat talking about the blues, blues this, blues that, real blues, blah blah... only to then say he hates rap/hip hop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Del Nilppeznaf Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 Aha case closed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blindboygrunt Posted October 1, 2013 Author Share Posted October 1, 2013 Guitar music is dead Mr Epstien.......... very famous words those. The music is not timeless, as much sickening junk has been made, produced and released with 'real' instruments as with anything electronic. What's timeless is someone making an artistic piece of work which connects, be it for depth, be it for virtuosity, be it just for pure rock n roll spirit. Music in general and priducers especially can cover all manner of weak spots etc.. what they cant do is make something sound like they mean it when they dont. That's the difference no matter what the musical medium, you can always hear the folk that mean it, the rest of the charts no matter what the era is just filled up with the extra passengers. Well put mister. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParlourMan Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 How so, Del.... We've still not concluded the "I'm right" Vs "This is my opinion" part...... and all that before discussing how irrelevant a person must be to sit down and tell youngsters everything they're into is crap.... Apart from being pointless because no absolutes exist, it's just an indicator of someone who's forgotten how to be young, or even young at heart. Let the kids be, the one listening to shite at the minute might draw the same conclusions in a little while, make his own record and blow all your tired, jaded & judgemental minds. For all the hippies, mystics and whatnot in here, seems to be a helluva lack of faith in people.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EuroAussie Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 John Fullbright, From the grave Got to see him on Friday in London, very very good. So thanks to this thread I just bought my 2nd CD for the year, John Fullbrights latest, great stuff, this is a good thread ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blindboygrunt Posted October 1, 2013 Author Share Posted October 1, 2013 So thanks to this thread I just bought my 2nd CD for the year, John Fullbrights latest, great stuff, this is a good thread ! That's a good un. Liked that one myself Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mojorule Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 So thanks to this thread I just bought my 2nd CD for the year, John Fullbrights latest, great stuff, this is a good thread ! While you're at it, Ozymandias, try the Shovels and Rope album. Sort of White Stripes for hillbillies. They just beat JF to the Emerging Artist gong at the Americana Awards, and won song of the year to boot. The fact that Fullbright didn't win indicates just how good a year it has been for new stuff on the alt country/folk side of things. PM, I agree utterly that the question of what floats one's boat is entirely subjective. When it comes to what really moves us in any cultural field we are not rational enough for ideas of superior or inferior taste to have any relevance. In that case, it is just condescending and rather myopic to belittle any generation's personal mores. Also I have listened to 'yer old mate Brian Matthews' enough on Saturday mornings to know just how vast the vista of crap sixties material is. (I also had an encounter with 'Edison Lighthouse' at a caravan site one Saturday evening this summer, which just proved that some sixties survivors can't even cover their own material effectively.) But clearly there are some aspects of taste which can be assessed according to more objective criteria - even if the objectivity concerned is itself relative in the grand, cosmic scheme of things. However fabricated the fabs were, it's pretty clear to me that they were more into the music than Harry Styles is. Having Astrid Kirchherr do your hair and finding a record shop owner from Liverpool to manage you is not quite the same as being picked by Gary Barlow because you sing like every other vaguely successful X Factor contestant and look good in an average way, so that Simon Cowell can manage you in a pre-designed slot which he has hollowed out for you through a decade's worth of similar work with similar 'artists'. Harry's music may mean as much to twelve-year olds now as the Beatles' records did to kids back in 1965. That's fine in itself. But the creative input of the Beatles in their success was obviously so much greater than that of Harry in the multi-million-pound concern that is One Direction. That much is not a subjective opinion, and loose comments about 'it all being subjective', as we end up with elsewhere on this thread, actually ignore some hard historical fact. Had all sixties bands been managed by Mickie Most throughout their career, then perhaps we could write off the historical differences more easily, because for sure there were plenty of singers with no significant creative talent then as well. But Mickie Most and kin didn't monopolize the whole music industry then, and he couldn't really tame the Animals when he managed them in any case. There is also a broader historical aspect to this whole debate which also introduces an element of objectivity to things. However derivative early rock 'n' roll was, it did yield original songs and introduce new audiences to black music. Whereas so many hits now have a tie-in to the X Factor and are covers of well-known past hits. True there were many covers in the sixties too. But covering Berry Gordy's 'Money' in 1963 was objectively not of the same cultural value as covering Blondie's 'One Way or Another' in 2013. The former act was introducing a Motown song to a much wider audience and making black music more acceptable to non-black audiences. Aside from the charity element which is no doubt laudable, the latter act should have something close to zero social and cultural impact, since the song should already be well known in its original version. That the song perhaps wasn't actually well known to modern twelve-year olds till One Direction released it does actually say something objective about the way music is consumed now, the role of radio, and the relative disconnect between young people and general musical heritage today. The internet makes a much wider range of music available more easily than radio ever did, but radio had DJs who played a taste-making role which has not been replicated on the web. There is no John Peel, Nicky Campbell or Mark Radcliffe for the web. This is not the doing of twelve-year olds, but of the adults surrounding them. At the same time, though, the fact that kids have the impression that a thirty-five-year-old song is cutting edge is hardly making it easy for creative people to develop new directions in music. Originality is not as great a force as it was, even if it is still very much present and correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParlourMan Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 good post Mojo.... A few points.... Agreed on the One Direction point, while it may be the best thing for 12 year olds, I would exclude it as it falls outwith the usual range of 15-25 for musical tastes maturing and becoming the personal benchmark for peoples future listening. If we're going to bring the Beatles in to it (hard not to I guess) we must accept they were a bit of an anomaly.... rare has a boy band, or any band matched such creativity, however, none were very good looking, none were typical boyband fodder of today, so whacking four lads in the same suit and similar haircuts is what constituted a boy band back then... in Paul's own words, the FA cup final was for boys, the Beatles was the girls equivalent. Thankfully for us (and them) the depth of talent there was immense, varied, enduring, forever shifting. The downside is now we'll get Americans going on about how they 'own' them, they don't, they never did, neither did the people of the UK, nor even Liverpool itself, it was a slick machine that just kept ticking along based on 4 individuals and the necessary support network around them. Nodoby else... Sure they may have admired an awful lot of music coming from the black scenes of the time, but what America really did for the Beatles was make them very wealthy. however, back to the topic at hand, half the motown groups were fiddled about with by svengalis etc... plenty backroom deals to be unearthed there, the 'marketable switch' has existed all along, from the cheesefest that Simon Cowell sells today, but all the way back to when music became a lucrative industry run by sharks. A timely reminder it has always been called the music business. Back to a general post.......... We all like to think we know better, especially with artistic and cultural tastes but what benefit is there to being a musical snob, people have to find their own path to what they love, not be condescended to by some old farts who like nothing except 'boring dad music', one thing for the young of today, they seem to be more ecclectic in their tastes as far as it goes with music, art, fashion etc.... lest we forget you can't put an old head on young shoulders... oh and that other old chestnut, youth is wasted on the young... weigh them up for a second and ponder how bitter we must come off to people... waxing on about how it was better 'in our day..', 'when music was music' and all that.... We''ve all haad the entire world in front of us at one point, but you only get to live that for a wee while, it's someone elses turn now, we'd do much better to be less bitter and condescending about it. Another battle cry we see all the time is about kids in GC, where the hell are they supposed to go? Is it not better for them to be in GC than waiting on you coming out of GC to take all your stuff, stab you and leave you on the street to kark it? The same people probably take their own kids to restaurants etc... well that's how people feel about your kids, they're thinking that B... bringing his kids here to ruin my meal with their noise and the very fact they exist. All we ever see on here is a bunch of b*tching about youngsters in amongst string threads of course :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fortyearspickn Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 Last discussion we had on this topic that I remember - we were discussing the appropriateness of The Jonas Brothers playing Gibson acoustics. Now, J.Beiber plays a Dove and an H'bird. Granted, mostly sings while holding said guitars. We've gone round and round on "Beatles" or "Stones" ? In a manner reminiscent of the more pithy question "Ginger" or "MaryAnn"? I'm not sure that anyone here can question, poke holes, or even modify PM's point that our musical taste begins to develop AROUND 15yo and then is established within 10 years, with everything after that just building and expanding on that frame of reference. Yes, some go in the direction of blues, other towards jazz. Many, sadly stay mired in whatever The Moneymakers throw at them in "The Top 40". My 18 month old grand daughter loves "Teensy Weensy Spider". We did a stint babysitting" with her a couple of weeks ago and stuck in "Wiggles" DVD. As you know, they are probably 50% musical. She was mesmerized. Transfixed. For an hour, she didn't move, sitting on the beanbag chair. I could literally see her 'music appreciation' growing like a hot house tomato. Shift to my 13 yo grandson. Trying to get him to appreciate/expand his sheltered musical appreciation as I have been teaching him to play guitar. His 'best of the best' is "Life is a Highway" ala Rascal Flats. A group I'll turn the radio off for. He likes the song, because he liked the cartoon movie "Cars". So his musical appreciation has grown more slowly. My point, while these two will no doubt go in different musical direction - a function of their ages and sex for starters and, equally important - what they are exposed to - they will establish a foundation when they get to the age where they realize that music can help them understand and deal with life. If you didn't have Indian music (sitar/Ravi Shankar) imprinted on you when you had arrived at the foundation building point of your musical development - you would be an outlier/exception is you suddenly decided that genre was core to your being. Of course, two very different people who've built different musical foundations can wind up at the same place. We have a few examples here! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JuanCarlosVejar Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 Ive always loved Heroin Girl, cracker of a track. World of Noise and SParkle and Fade were awesome albums ! JC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mojorule Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 Very cogent point about manufactured Motown, PM. Take your house band and stick a range of singers with good pipes in front of them, and Berry's yer uncle. It's not a million miles away from what Cowell and Co do, for sure. But while the sessioneers who service the X Factor products may be even more technically adept than the Funk Brothers (the bassists can surely do a passable James Jamerson bass line, then take off Larry Graham before doing a spot of Geezer Butler), they haven't produced a truly distinctive and recognizable sound of their own in the way that the Motown Boys did. And the other thing about Motown was that it was a hot house for writing talent, and made household names of Holland-Dozier-Holland, Smokey Robinson and Stevie Wonder. Not sure what new writing talent has been broken by the current rash of svengalis. Plus Motown gave Smokey and Stevie the chance to become star performers as well. The problem is not the musical taste of today's youngsters. Nor is it a lack of talent and originality on the part of creative types. But there is currently a serious problem in music, as there is in literature and the visual arts. We've sort of settled collectively - despite mass moans - into a cultural economy which really doesn't promote excellence in the form of originality and innovation in the mainstream. Those forms of excellence can still flourish on the fringes for sure, but with little of the financial support that they might have had previously. Meanwhile the mainstream in pretty well every cultural genre is all about paying for slick professionalism, which essentially means sticking to a well-worn path, keeping to the script, and not making any interesting mistakes. At some level that might be construed as excellence, but such excellence is essentially the flawless execution of tasks defined according to mediocre parameters. Which is effectively mediocrity dressed up, put on a pedestal, and done without errors. The 99% perspiration without the inspiration. The triumph of planning over passion. It's not a generational thing - indeed if any generation has produced this sorry state of affairs, it is the very baby boomers who produced the sixties idyll. But it is a historical thing. good post Mojo.... A few points.... Agreed on the One Direction point, while it may be the best thing for 12 year olds, I would exclude it as it falls outwith the usual range of 15-25 for musical tastes maturing and becoming the personal benchmark for peoples future listening. If we're going to bring the Beatles in to it (hard not to I guess) we must accept they were a bit of an anomaly.... rare has a boy band, or any band matched such creativity, however, none were very good looking, none were typical boyband fodder of today, so whacking four lads in the same suit and similar haircuts is what constituted a boy band back then... in Paul's own words, the FA cup final was for boys, the Beatles was the girls equivalent. Thankfully for us (and them) the depth of talent there was immense, varied, enduring, forever shifting. The downside is now we'll get Americans going on about how they 'own' them, they don't, they never did, neither did the people of the UK, nor even Liverpool itself, it was a slick machine that just kept ticking along based on 4 individuals and the necessary support network around them. Nodoby else... Sure they may have admired an awful lot of music coming from the black scenes of the time, but what America really did for the Beatles was make them very wealthy. however, back to the topic at hand, half the motown groups were fiddled about with by svengalis etc... plenty backroom deals to be unearthed there, the 'marketable switch' has existed all along, from the cheesefest that Simon Cowell sells today, but all the way back to when music became a lucrative industry run by sharks. A timely reminder it has always been called the music business. Back to a general post.......... We all like to think we know better, especially with artistic and cultural tastes but what benefit is there to being a musical snob, people have to find their own path to what they love, not be condescended to by some old farts who like nothing except 'boring dad music', one thing for the young of today, they seem to be more ecclectic in their tastes as far as it goes with music, art, fashion etc.... lest we forget you can't put an old head on young shoulders... oh and that other old chestnut, youth is wasted on the young... weigh them up for a second and ponder how bitter we must come off to people... waxing on about how it was better 'in our day..', 'when music was music' and all that.... We''ve all haad the entire world in front of us at one point, but you only get to live that for a wee while, it's someone elses turn now, we'd do much better to be less bitter and condescending about it. Another battle cry we see all the time is about kids in GC, where the hell are they supposed to go? Is it not better for them to be in GC than waiting on you coming out of GC to take all your stuff, stab you and leave you on the street to kark it? The same people probably take their own kids to restaurants etc... well that's how people feel about your kids, they're thinking that B... bringing his kids here to ruin my meal with their noise and the very fact they exist. All we ever see on here is a bunch of b*tching about youngsters in amongst string threads of course :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
larryp58 Posted October 2, 2013 Share Posted October 2, 2013 I agree with Rambler's comments. Those early artists from the 60's and '70's set the parameters for everything that came after. Not saying that today's music is crap, it's just not what we were cutting our teeth on back in those days. I guess it's harder for us "ol' farts" to get into todays music because we got to witness the evolution of recorded music in the '60's and '70's. From rock 'n' roll, folk, country, and all genres. IMHO, by the mid '80's everything had been done musically. After that, it's just new artists trying to copy what's already been done. Enter record labels. Now it's all about money. That's why most music released now is mostly "for profit only". Maybe one interesting song on an album, the rest is just "filler". I don't doubt the talent of some of today's artists at all. Look at the music that's been recorded since the '60's to learn from! I do think a few of today's artists are very talented musicians and songwriters. It just that the "masters" that came before will always set the bar for anything done today. That's a hard leap to overcome for a young musician or band. As the competition grows for sales in today's market, I see in the future (IMHO), albums being released that keep you listening to the end. No "filler" tracks, just great songs. To end on a bright note, all great musicians and artists will separate themselves from the "posers" by their talent and music. Music is always changing, right around the corner someone is about to turn the music business upside down again! There will be artists and labels who will try to copy them, but the true artists will rise to the top. P.S.- I'm still listening to the old stuff!!! In my CD player in my truck right now is "No Reason To Cry" by Clapton! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blindboygrunt Posted October 2, 2013 Author Share Posted October 2, 2013 Hey Larry , any worthiness your statement might've had went out the window with an admittance of listening to Clapton :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
larryp58 Posted October 2, 2013 Share Posted October 2, 2013 Hey Larry , any worthiness your statement might've had went out the window with an admittance of listening to Clapton :D [lol] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry K Posted October 2, 2013 Share Posted October 2, 2013 It sort of amazes me that so many posters think music began in the sixties. All of your sixties idols were nourished on the stuff that came before them, and plenty of that was recorded. I grew up in the fifties and sixties so I can appreciate rock and roll and all that, but it is not the sum total of great music. In the last few years I listened to many of the pop and rock stars I liked in the sixties and looking back now, I see that most of it constituted a degradation and dumbing down of what had gone before. Hair, costumes, amplifiers, sexy posturing, marketing, etc. substituted to a great extent for musicianship and songwriting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParlourMan Posted October 2, 2013 Share Posted October 2, 2013 It sort of amazes me that so many posters think music began in the sixties. All of your sixties idols were nourished on the stuff that came before them, and plenty of that was recorded. I grew up in the fifties and sixties so I can appreciate rock and roll and all that, but it is not the sum total of great music. In the last few years I listened to many of the pop and rock stars I liked in the sixties and looking back now, I see that most of it constituted a degradation and dumbing down of what had gone before. Hair, costumes, amplifiers, sexy posturing, marketing, etc. substituted to a great extent for musicianship and songwriting. No they just realised that not everything had to be jazz, Jerry. Plenty great music from every decade and dumbing down has been going on since the age of the great composers. Not so much for songwriting but certainly for musicianship. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.