JuanCarlosVejar Posted October 15, 2012 Share Posted October 15, 2012 she played a koa small jumbo sized guitar : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWrKPH31bhc and one of these also : JC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EuroAussie Posted October 15, 2012 Share Posted October 15, 2012 Colbie who ... ?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j45nick Posted October 15, 2012 Share Posted October 15, 2012 More bubblegum pop music. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JuanCarlosVejar Posted October 15, 2012 Author Share Posted October 15, 2012 lol I know ... She's kinda like the gibsonized version of Taylor Swift who is one of Bob Taylors Pets ! JC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanvillRob Posted October 15, 2012 Share Posted October 15, 2012 lol I know ... She's kinda like the gibsonized version of Taylor Swift who is one of Bob Taylors Pets ! JC More like a female Justin Bieber, (but more masculine, and she holds the DIF the 'right' way). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The G Posted October 15, 2012 Share Posted October 15, 2012 More like a female Justin Bieber, (but more masculine, and she holds the DIF the 'right' way). Tuff Crowd !!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeremy Morton Posted October 15, 2012 Share Posted October 15, 2012 Great Performance! Sound is great for a live performance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParlourMan Posted October 15, 2012 Share Posted October 15, 2012 Yep, sounds like a desk recording with a bit of post production work smeared across it. Pop artist or not, she's up there doing it. Many of the great artists mentioned on these pages built their career on being a pop artist. In fact the entire Brit invasion of the 60's was no different to One Direction or Mr Beiber today, just like then some oldies are having a bit of a moan about it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Del Nilppeznaf Posted October 15, 2012 Share Posted October 15, 2012 Yep, sounds like a desk recording with a bit of post production work smeared across it. Pop artist or not, she's up there doing it. Many of the great artists mentioned on these pages built their career on being a pop artist. In fact the entire Brit invasion of the 60's was no different to One Direction or Mr Beiber today, just like then some oldies are having a bit of a moan about it So your comparing The Beatles and the Stones to ermmmmm those you mention above The original clip isn't all that bad.. but come come.... those two acts you mention have got to be 2 the most plastic manufactured example of corporate music today and they aint nothing like the British bands that you allude to Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParlourMan Posted October 15, 2012 Share Posted October 15, 2012 The musical calibre is just preference and taste, Del. The Beatles had a massive amount of manufacturing in them, Epstien created the Beatles that catapulted those 4 boys and allowed them to become 'the Beatles' we talk of today. Essentially they were fixed up, dressed up, boy band... there's endless tales about them going round friends collecting all the dodgy pics that had been taken of them etc... All very simon Cowell / Syco. It was severely modeled in what would be referred to in todays terms as a 'svengali' mode, the difference lies in the fact they were a hit machine from their own ever growing pool of talent. But essentially it's the same thing... pop music for young girls. The stones were manufactured as a juxtaposition to the Beatles (cleverly so, as they couldn't compete for the same market space) again all very moulded, by your svengali types. Just as todays plasticy ones are.... That's not to say I don't agree that the musical output was (to my taste) infinitely better in both the Beatles & The Stones' case than what was compared above, but if I argued that with an 11 year old girl, who's actually right? One of the cruelest things in music is for those taking part in it to see is that it's a business, people invest in acts they can sell more than anything of intrinsic value, again I would offer the quote "No thanks Mr Epstein, guitar groups are on the way out" and neither Mr Martin, nor Mr Lennon & McCartney thought it would last anything more than a few singles themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fortyearspickn Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 At least The Monkees were legit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j45nick Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 At least The Monkees were legit. Although Michael Nesmith did have talent. Some pretty famous people (like Stephen Stills) auditioned for that show, as I recall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E-minor7 Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 If I wasn't an acoustic monk, I would eat this woman head to toes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motherofpearl Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 I'm at a bieber show right now lol with my 2 beautiful girls and I he can put a smile on they're face I'm happy!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motherofpearl Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 Also just to add he just played a black hummingbird. No dif tonight haha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MissouriPicker Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 Not my particular style of music (light and airy and the world is happy) and it's not my favorite look for a Gibby (looks like a Taylor), but I could watch her stand there for a long, long time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
struma6 Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 I guess I have no proper taste. I thought she sounded great. Nice vox, catchy song that's well structured and hooky. Does she need to be all Alt-edgy, middle finger up to be legitimate music? I enjoyed it, everything else is just chin-boogie BS. Way, way way better than a boat-load of commercial corp-crap out there. I'd listen to this long before I'd suffer through 99.9% of the nashville country formulitic pap that sells millions. Good for her. Anyone who doesn't realize Sir Paul is arguably the biggest commercial whore ever is ignoring everything but the hype. Awesome writer absolutely, knows the biz definitely, would sell one of his testicles for a hit album...yep. He's great, he's pop and willing to "sell out" to the highest bidder. Does that make his body of work illegitimate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E-minor7 Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 Essentially they were fixed up, dressed up, boy band... there's endless tales about them going round friends collecting all the dodgy pics that had been taken of them etc... All very simon Cowell / Syco. It was severely modeled in what would be referred to in todays terms as a 'svengali' mode, the difference lies in the fact they were a hit machine from their own ever growing pool of talent. There are many clear thoughts and views in you post PM, but you seem to overlook the cultural factor as a whole and what The Fab, if not started, then blew up in proportions the world hadn't seen before, , , plus all those frozen and dated barriers that was broken down in that maneuver. Times were ready for them, Dylan and Stones, yes – but they very quickly went out a designed the moves themselves. After mid-65 no one could guide the guys – simply due to the fact that they (and their fellow front-runners in music, film, art, fashion and so forth) from then on were the only ones who knew and had the antenna-gear to sense the coming directions. No mystery that sad Epstein was driven behind (lords bless him), , , and imagine what challenges mister George Martin and staff had to handle in the studio from the middle of the decade and forward. Ask any witness from the times (you know we have a few here) and they'll tell how strong the salto was working – and I mean strong in a way todays envelope pushers could only dream of. In fact I have the feeling you realize yourself. I also see some contradiction in the "essential a boy band"-statement and the ever growing pool of talent you mention in the next line. That pool wasn't invented or postulated over nite. Of course it had been there from the start and of course it needed time and space to grow. When the lads began to approach the mixing console, it was tabu for the artists in business. Same about coming up with ideas for f.x. covers, dare I say cover-art. Writing songs was normally done by pros in the other end of town and writing songs with lyrics that actually gave deeper meaning or spoke dangerously savage, surreal or challenging, was just never heard, , , in that end of the musical spectrum anyway. Getting into the collarless jackets and ties was one thing, , , the way they got out of them was quite another. And that, as said, began to happen as soon as shortly after A Hard Days Night, late 1964. Finally – If there should be endless tales about the members goin' round collecting dodgy pictures, it slipped my attention. Then again I haven't seen or read all. Still as a follower since Help ! and a friend to some of the heaviest experts in this country, I'd be more than interested if you could provide links, sources and other paths to these rumors. Not to mention a few of the pics. As you might know, I'm here to learn. Best Thoughts - Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParlourMan Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 There are many clear thoughts and views in you post PM, but you seem to overlook the cultural factor as a whole and what The Fab, if not started, then blew up in proportions the world hadn't seen before, , , plus all those frozen and dated barriers that was broken down in that maneuver. Times were ready for them, Dylan and Stones, yes – but they very quickly went out a designed the moves themselves. After mid-65 no one could guide the guys – simply due to the fact that they (and their fellow front-runners in music, film, art, fashion and so forth) from then on were the only ones who knew and had the antenna-gear to sense the coming directions. No mystery that sad Epstein was driven behind (lords bless him), , , and imagine what challenges mister George Martin and staff had to handle in the studio from the middle of the decade and forward. Ask any witness from the times (you know we have a few here) and they'll tell how strong the salto was working – and I mean strong in a way todays envelope pushers could only dream of. In fact I have the feeling you realize yourself. I also see some contradiction in the "essential a boy band"-statement and the ever growing pool of talent you mention in the next line. That pool wasn't invented or postulated over nite. Of course it had been there from the start and of course it needed time and space to grow. When the lads began to approach the mixing console, it was tabu for the artists in business. Same about coming up with ideas for f.x. covers, dare I say cover-art. Writing songs was normally done by pros in the other end of town and writing songs with lyrics that actually gave deeper meaning or spoke dangerously savage, surreal or challenging, was just never heard, , , in that end of the musical spectrum anyway. Getting into the collarless jackets and ties was one thing, , , the way they got out of them was quite another. And that, as said, began to happen as soon as shortly after A Hard Days Night, late1964. Finally – If there should be endless tales about the members goin' round collecting dodgy pictures, it slipped my attention. Then again I haven't seen or read all. Still as a follower since Help ! and a friend to some of the heaviest experts in this country, I'd be more than interested if you could provide links, sources and other paths to these rumors. Not to mention a few of the pics. As you might know, I'm here to learn. Best Thoughts - Contradiction? The contradiction turned out to be themselves. Let's have a look..... Heavy duty image change with the noted comment "none of us had to be dragged to get a suit, we were all willing". The fact they were dictated to regarding use of session drummers after Starr replaced best but befopre Starr had been heard playing. Where was the "strong" there? The "running around liverpool collecting all the old dodgy pics", see Anthology for a further explanation of this... Lest we forget early recordings were mostly of other peoples stuff, their writing was taken as a side-issue initially. So without going to pedantic level to try and score a point here, there's plenty evidence to demonstrate the cultivating and manufacturing of a "boy band" image. Even Some of them themselves described Beatlemania as "The girls equivalent of an FA Cup Final" perhaps I shoild have likened them to Take That or NSync, boy bands who wrote their own material... Once you add in personal thought from the band, Lennon in particular "It didn't start happening until Rubber Soul" it further demonstrates how they felt and how they'd changed from the moulded little pop band with their rehearsed one-liners and lying about members who were married. As you rightly say, they turned the tables, they became the true talent they were rather than just the talent as we see in most manufactured pop. However take away the history and look at the early period and you will see a manufactured pop band, designed to sell, being led by a svengali type figure.... It's undeniable. Another way to look at it (the above colbie clip) is all of us "better" musicians with our more "meaningful songs" are recording them at home and posting them online for free while this girl is making vids, getting high profile gigs and further up the ladder than most of us will ever get to. Too much moaning about it sounds like sour grapes. The bottom line is they (the music business) can sell her, they can't sell us or we'd be the ones doing GC gigs and having post production work on our live takes all over the internet. Would I buy her record? No. Would I go see her live? probably not, no. Can I recognise that she's further up the musical ladder than I'm likely to ever get? Yes of course. Should I get bitter about that? No, it's a business, she's a more popular commodity than I am. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Del Nilppeznaf Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 Contradiction? The contradiction turned out to be themselves. Let's have a look..... ROLF ....... [lol] [lol] I expected such a response from you PM I didn't feel it was worth going into as your claims are clearly ludicrous...hahahaha I will get some coffee down me and take tour new statements into consideration Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E-minor7 Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 Contradiction? Okay, Lennon was always the first violinist when it came to cynical remarks about this and that. That goes for the group also. But as he said : I can put Beatles down, , , don't let Mick do it. Another superficial comment would be the one about things starting to happening around Rubber Soul. Yes, it was in mid-65 as I mentioned, but still the comment is a little Johnny Silver goes smart. Listen to Twist And Shout, , , or f.x. to his sublime showmanship in Ask Me Why and hear it happen right there. If he forgot due to heavier things happening, the rest of the world didn't. In on second-cynical violin came Harrison. Always in the footprints of John, he had his share of putting the band down too. He shall not be blamed, but when I read him say that The Beatles was nothing but a eeeeehhh, , , , boy band in the 90's, I regarded him a fool. Then again, what do I know about boy bands, , , and what did George. . . . I've seen the Anthology and don't remember the particular photo issue. If it's there, fine, , , but honestly – what a detail to drag from the hat - it's nothing, , , and particularly zero compared to all the cool stuff from the early period. Why not just realize that those guys carried a pretty cool DNA – and celebrate that fact with the rest of us. Then I admit you draw up a bigger and more relevant rabbit too. They compromised a lot – in fact they did everything (or almost everything) to break it. The German singles, the Coke commercial, the suits, perhaps even the witty, charming, mysterious, clowny stereotypes and further. But it was first60's showbiz ParlourMan, , , , or nothing - a do or die play. Btw. didn't you wear a polite tie last time you got yourself a new job, , , or a nice harmless haircut, whatever. "We were a Trojan Horse", continued bold John in his later years. Indeed they were ! But we – the little crowd around them - enjoyed the show weather they were in or outside that bloody stallion from the first chord of Love Me Do. Let me stop by assuring you I got very good friends, who don't really get the vibe either. In other words there's already room for you weirdos hehe, , , not for a jam-session though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Del Nilppeznaf Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 Seriously PM you and who ever gave you that little green lantern have got to be out of your freakin minds if you are going to compare the The Beatles to...ermm One Direction...hahahaha Justin beiber..rolf.. Take feckin THAT ..or anyone else really. For a start look at the Hamburg period... no one forcing them there my friend... 5 young ( didn't harrison get deported for being under age at one point ) Liverpool lads ( which changed along the way ) playing the red light district of a hip dangerous city. Night after night.. 8 hour shows.. LEARNING THEIR TRADE I see no great svengali influence ... just a love of music and a desire to earn a crust and play music. Of course the music business is just that... A Business... the massive thing you are missing PM ( and seriously... you are sooo cynical its a shame... I know you work in thew business world..but really..there is real stuff still in the world PM xx ) the thing you are missing is the Beatles and the people around them basically invented the feckin business side of it... Beatlemania wasn't PLANNED..it was a phenomena... it was just the right time ect..but what catapulted those four mop tops into that hemisphere had a lot to do with TALENT We could go on and on into this.... that haircut the mop top ..was first done by the German artist lassi and taken up by the other members.. no image manipulation there. They wanted to play to bigger arenas..and of course they played the game God..where do you want to go with it.. their first single..Love Me Do if I'm correct... original material... even when the first started recording..it was basically ALL original material PM.. this was sort of un heard of. If you want some corporate speak, they where a game changer.. THE GAME CHANGER To seriously attempt to say; they are basically what the music industry pumps out now, is bloody LUDICROUS !!!!!! Take That ?????? N Sync ????? What they hell are you talki8ng about ? hahaha Gary fckin Barlow... come on man... that is a clear state of just what the music industry has turned into. The only member of a manufacrtured band that had an ounce of musical ability..and he's been elevated to one of Englands great song writers..don't. make me fckin laugh Do you think Morrisy...Ian brown... Noel bloody Gallagher would have got past the first audition of XFACTOR.... for gods sake PM The Beatles changed music ...FOREVER... even thier early records..you can still listen to. Some of those songs are just genius..they are more than POP music...the influences ..the sound...it was like nothing before..or since in my opinion. No band has written music like them.... but most will have been influenced by them. I could go on and on..haha They main thing you are missing PM... is those ACTS you mention have no freekin TALENT they are purley ACTS... that look good in the medium... and just because some bird looks good with a guitar and has a video on you tube doesn't make her relevant to anything but Simon Cowells arse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParlourMan Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 ROLF ....... [lol] [lol] I expected such a response from you PM I didn't feel it was worth going into as your claims are clearly ludicrous...hahahaha I will get some coffee down me and take tour new statements into consideration Why ludicrous, Del? The Beatles* invented the global boy band phenomenon, that much is widely and factually accepted. I'm curious as to why you can't see that... I'm most certainly not the first person to point it out. If you can't see that perhaps you're having trouble with the term 'boyband' lets not try to re-write pop history, Del, that would be silly... it is what it is. * I'm actually a huge Beatles fan, so it's not a slight against them, I'd argue they were the best band ever thus far with anyone, all day and all night if I had to, but they started out as a pub blues band and were moulded into a manufactured pop band for young girls, this is fact, no amount of Revolution #9's or I am the Walrus' can take that historical fact away. To deny it makes you look rather silly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EuroAussie Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 Thank god Del and PM are back to their normal courtship ..... was starting to feel like a 7 year marriage there for a while ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blindboygrunt Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 yeah , ding ding , seconds away but i'm enjoying this , all three (em7's involved i this too ) make valid and intelligent points i think . it's making for good reading at work here . my personal take on it is that while PM's definately taking a cynical route , no one can claim that they havent played the game on their way up the ladder . its pretty much impossible to get on it without bending forward slightly . bands like pearl jam built their image on being anti image .... ended up with one of the strongest images in music. the beatles definately became a 'boy band' wether they wanted it or not and rode the wave to theit advantage . when the stones popped up as the dirty flip side to the beatles , their 'unwashing' was used as a selling point , they created a fetish .... image image image . no amount of musical talent will get you onto stage at madison square garden without an image to help sell it . and if you've even now heard of the girl in the opening video , well then , more power to her . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.