'Scales Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 I dunno man, at the end of the day the species is driven by the same base instincts it always has been - same as most others. The efforts by those with the will and wherewithal to curb these over past millennia are ultimately pretty much underpinned by those same instincts. None of it will matter ultimately - lets enjoy the ride best we can! Yep - Hope and dream, why not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlie brown Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 The more I see, and read about, this year's Grammy's, the more of a total "Trainwreck" it seems to have been. Marred by technical problems, and lack luster performances, never mind the questionable awards, and acceptance speeches. Must have been a real nightmare, for so many? CB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
surfpup Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 I don't watch any awards. It's all b***ocks. Just a load of egotistical fools praising each other up. This I gave up on them years ago. I was rehearsing with some bandmates - one said. "Hey we gotta quit in time to watch the Grammys". Really? You want to quit making music to watch people get awards for making (mostly) bad music? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlie brown Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 Didn't watch, don't care. I like what I like. Not what someone tells me is fashionable this year. Yeah, I never watch them, anymore, either! Those, the Academy Awards, etc. None of them. I was only referring to what I've read, regarding all the problems, this year. What a mess! CB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dennis G Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 I record the "gratuitous" shows such as these so I can fast forward through most of the BS I don't want to watch, especially since someone like Taylor Swift (who couldn't carry a tune with a pickiup truck) is the "new" face of the music industry, such that it is. Once again, I say this, although after reading this thread, I'm kind of torn about what I want to watch now LOL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rct Posted February 17, 2016 Author Share Posted February 17, 2016 The more I see, and read about, this year's Grammy's, the more of a total "Trainwreck" it seems to have been. Marred by technical problems, and lack luster performances, never mind the questionable awards, and acceptance speeches. Must have been a real nightmare, for so many? CB Jesus christ you guys, it's a friggin teevee show! MAN you guys must a hoot at parties. [laugh] [laugh] [laugh] rct Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stein Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 Jesus christ you guys, it's a friggin teevee show! MAN you guys must a hoot at parties. [laugh] [laugh] [laugh] rct Suggesting Gibson Forum awards? I'm in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cody78 Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 Haven't watched an awards show in about 20 years and I have never heard Taylor Swift's music (but I have heard of her name). I never to listen to the radio so I avoid all pop music thank God and also avoid the news on TV and therefore miss all the hype about the Grammys and all the other depressing things happening in the world Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rct Posted February 17, 2016 Author Share Posted February 17, 2016 Haven't watched an awards show in about 20 years and I have never heard Taylor Swift's music (but I have heard of her name). I never to listen to the radio so I avoid all pop music thank God and also avoid the news on TV and therefore miss all the hype about the Grammys and all the other depressing things happening in the world That's a shame. rct Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cody78 Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 That's a shame. rct ...but life's happier that way. Just look at the stress the Grammys have caused people on this thread Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LPS1976 Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 ...but life's happier that way. Just look at the stress the Grammys have caused people on this thread BUT...there's good pop music and bad pop music. I think people are doing themselves a dis-service if they don't at least see what's out there. if the Grammys caused people stress; it's their fault, not the Grammys or Taylor Swift or Lady GaGA. if you take away a lot of the glam and some of the "artists" there are some pretty good songs out there. one good example is Ryan Adams re-imagining Taylor Swifts last record. take away her seven producers, the polished sound, her, and the songs hold up. just my 2 cents. you like what you like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rct Posted February 17, 2016 Author Share Posted February 17, 2016 BUT...there's good pop music and bad pop music. I think people are doing themselves a dis-service if they don't at least see what's out there. if the Grammys caused people stress; it's their fault, not the Grammys or Taylor Swift or Lady GaGA. if you take away a lot of the glam and some of the "artists" there are some pretty good songs out there. one good example is Ryan Adams re-imagining Taylor Swifts last record. take away her seven producers, the polished sound, her, and the songs hold up. just my 2 cents. you like what you like. I am never not astounded that people that call themselves musicians can not see the forest of songs and arrangements and production for the trees of pop stars. And then we all dabbed at our eyes about Bowie, the quintessential pop star. rct Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cody78 Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 I am never not astounded that people that call themselves musicians can not see the forest of songs and arrangements and production for the trees of pop stars. And then we all dabbed at our eyes about Bowie, the quintessential pop star. rct You do make a good point rct, but I never much cared for Bowie's music though I like a few of his tunes. Some pop is ok, but I used to work at a place about 13 years ago that only ever played commercial radio and it drove me nuts! Over here in the UK the radio options were limited at the time, the only station I ever used to listen to was Classic FM (classical as the name implies), but everyone at work hated it! There wasn't even any good rock or jazz stations either. I don't really know why people listen to radio anymore anyway. Spotify is great for finding new music and you are not forced to listen to music you don't care for. Problem is, pop gets maximum exposure and all other styles seem to get swept under the rug and nobody has a clue who you are talking about. I listen to lots of modern music, just not radio stuff, hence 'Taylor who?!!' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rct Posted February 17, 2016 Author Share Posted February 17, 2016 You do make a good point rct, but I never much cared for Bowie's music though I like a few of his tunes. Some pop is ok, but I used to work at a place about 13 years ago that only ever played commercial radio and it drove me nuts! Over here in the UK the radio options were limited at the time, the only station I ever used to listen to was Classic FM (classical as the name implies), but everyone at work hated it! There wasn't even any good rock or jazz stations either. I don't really know why people listen to radio anymore anyway. Spotify is great for finding new music and you are not forced to listen to music you don't care for. I only listen to the radio on cross country trips with the Satellite in the rental. My iPod shows small gaps in pop music as I only hear what is on the Hits One and The Highway when we are, well, on the highway. Most pop will tell you in ten seconds if you'll feel it in the headphones, and I note them and get home and get them on the iPod followed maybe by the whole album, Pink and Paramore come to mind. People put serious work into that stuff. Then when you look into it, most of the teams are headed up by guys my age, taking the formulii that work and making them work again, creating new formulii along the way. It's all good stuff. I hate the radio and rarely turn it on in the car, only when Mrs insists. But I still love me some fresh, new, latest gag laden pop music. rct Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stein Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 Bowie was kind of a genius in a lot of aspects, and pretty deep. He did have radio hits and lots of commercial success, but for the most part, was able to gather a lot of hardcore fans. I think his best stuff wasn't the radio hits, but the music in-between. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rct Posted February 17, 2016 Author Share Posted February 17, 2016 Bowie was kind of a genius in a lot of aspects, and pretty deep. He did have radio hits and lots of commercial success, but for the most part, was able to gather a lot of hardcore fans. I think his best stuff wasn't the radio hits, but the music in-between. Pop music is pop music. What's good for a pop star of the 70s is just as good today. It's the disconnect I can never understand. rct Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
'Scales Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 Riff vs Groove Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stein Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 Pop music is pop music. What's good for a pop star of the 70s is just as good today. It's the disconnect I can never understand. rct Indeed, the same rules apply, for sure. What is pop? I think we all know what it is, but there is a sliding point where something purely "pop" begins and ends. For instance, there are genre's or artist that are quite successful and popular, but aren't in the pop mainstream. Lots of artist that sell lots of records or sell out stadiums, but aren't on the radio or the GP that much. What's really interesting about Bowie, he MADE himself a typical "pop star" by creating characters, even SONGS about being a pop star. Then turns around and makes himself "underground", by design and (lack of) marketing. "Underground" in the sense fans had to seek out his products, but at the same time, POPULAR as an "unpopular" artist, if that makes sense. More people knew who he was and were more interested in him when you couldn't buy his records. (There's a story there...a battle with RCA). What seems to be the case, is he was smart enough to know he had to spend time in the mainstream, and did, but made his bread and butter catering to his fans, selling buttlaods of "non-pop" records, which made the mainstream hungry for Bowie "pop", which he then might deliver. By far, the most interesting pop career I can think of. As much creativity there as in the music itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rct Posted February 17, 2016 Author Share Posted February 17, 2016 Indeed, the same rules apply, for sure. What is pop? I think we all know what it is, but there is a sliding point where something purely "pop" begins and ends. For instance, there are genre's or artist that are quite successful and popular, but aren't in the pop mainstream. Lots of artist that sell lots of records or sell out stadiums, but aren't on the radio or the GP that much. What's really interesting about Bowie, he MADE himself a typical "pop star" by creating characters, even SONGS about being a pop star. Then turns around and makes himself "underground", by design and (lack of) marketing. "Underground" in the sense fans had to seek out his products, but at the same time, POPULAR as an "unpopular" artist, if that makes sense. More people knew who he was and were more interested in him when you couldn't buy his records. (There's a story there...a battle with RCA). What seems to be the case, is he was smart enough to know he had to spend time in the mainstream, and did, but made his bread and butter catering to his fans, selling buttlaods of "non-pop" records, which made the mainstream hungry for Bowie "pop", which he then might deliver. By far, the most interesting pop career I can think of. As much creativity there as in the music itself. No offense, but this is about as vastly overthought as pop music gets, but I understand it in that you have to sort of protect what you think of as "Rock and Roll" or better music from long ago. I grew up then too, I think I'm a good deal older than you, so I'm not saying this out of the bluster of youth. Bowie was just as much a pop star as The Beatles, Doors, Hendrix, Tom Petty, Bruce, Skynyrd, and anyone else that put records out to make money and succeeded. Everyone else, Mclaughlin and Mahavishnu to Roy and Danny just didn't make money. That's the only difference. rct Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stein Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 No offense, but this is about as vastly overthought as pop music gets, but I understand it in that you have to sort of protect what you think of as "Rock and Roll" or better music from long ago. I grew up then too, I think I'm a good deal older than you, so I'm not saying this out of the bluster of youth. Bowie was just as much a pop star as The Beatles, Doors, Hendrix, Tom Petty, Bruce, Skynyrd, and anyone else that put records out to make money and succeeded. Everyone else, Mclaughlin and Mahavishnu to Roy and Danny just didn't make money. That's the only difference. rct No, I think you are right, but I get it. Bowie WAS a pop star, absolutely. There is a certain "game" to it, a formula, as you have been saying, that works and always has, and that part really, is simple. As in all things, most "rock and roll" that you say I and others are trying to protect (by not being "pop") is just as much "pop". It has to be, or else a particular artist doesn't achieve what we might universally call success. I guess bluntly, we are all "sell outs", or we ain't successful. There ain't no way around that. Any image that says otherwise is BS, or, just, image. But Bowie: you CAN "overthink it" regarding his career, and it actually adds up as deep as one chooses to go, and as simple as one can see it. I wouldn't say he invented the game, surely not. But who has played it better? Craft a song according to what the public wants to hear, craft an image to what the public wants to see, craft career moves depending on what the record companies are doing. I can't think of a single artist, or even producer, who has been able to do as well. He makes any type of music at the right time, any type of "image" that suits the current trends, and owns it all or not to his complete advantage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saturn Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Isn't it curious how a topic based on slamming or *****ing about stuff we hate, gets so many more hits than one praising something we like? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyingarmadillo Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Well, she just won "Album of the Year!" CB If you want to hear the tunes, but not Taylor doing them, Ryan Adams covered the entire album under the same title (1989). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quapman Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Pop music is pop music. What's good for a pop star of the 70s is just as good today. It's the disconnect I can never understand. rct I don't know man. This comment made me think. I don't recall ever liking the Grammy awards so I looked back at the winners from the 70's. My 70's. Like 74 on. I can tell you that for me I agree completely with your statement. The Grammys are just as good today as they were in the 70s. As great the talents of Roberta Flack, Bette Midler, Billy Preston, Debby Boone and Barry Manilow are, they are not and were not my cup of tea. In the exact same way that Taylor, beebs and whoever this weekend guy is, they are not, and will not ever, be my cup of tea. I don't care how much production goes into it. I can't help but not like popular music. I seek out anything that is not pop. I can't stand the predictability of the "formulii". I like indie label bands. I have listened to Zappa my entire life. I'm sorry but I don't share your love for the " latest gag laden pop music". I just don't get it. You seem like such a smart guy otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rct Posted February 18, 2016 Author Share Posted February 18, 2016 If you want to hear the tunes, but not Taylor doing them, Ryan Adams covered the entire album under the same title (1989). Because he didn't get them songs? Hey Ryan, you mad bro? rct Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Gibson Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Isn't it curious how a topic based on slamming or *****ing about stuff we hate, gets so many more hits than one praising something we like? [/ Entertaining watching ya'll when you get your dander up.🆒🆚🆕 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.