So as I posted a while ago that I do not really rate A Day In the Life as one of the best songs of all time. It is not a bad song, but to me , at least , it is not Kashmir or Hallelujah. It does amaze me that The Beatles remain so popular. Even amongst people that were not around when The Beatles were.
I was always in the other camp. As you may have gathered from my other posts if you have read them, I am a little bit contrary. As such I was much more attracted to the Rolling Stones image when I was growing up and was asked about it. My parents were very much of an age when that mattered. In 2011, does it matter anymore? Does anyone care about The Beatles and the Stones and which ones you thought were better?
Not really, if we are honest. In fact I am now a little more surprised if people have a strong opinion on it. It certainly doesn't come up very much. Does it mean that the music isn't relevant anymore? I am not so sure about that to be honest. I think that maybe music has moved on. But it is surprising how some of the early songs still stand up
That sounds like a Beatles song. Duh, but it has some lovely melodies and chord progressions. It is a good song. Not maybe the most popular or even the best from their early era, but it does have a lovely simple quality to it which means it still stands up as a good song. It is perhaps from a time when things seemed a lot more innocent, but that is timing and not quality.
Here is another to read along to.
I think their early music actually stands up a little bit better than their later more serious stuff. Honestly, I still do not get the fuss about Sergent Pepper. It is good, not good like Pet Sounds. Not good like The Doors, Deja vu etc.
However if you listen to this it sounds, much more trite, misplaced and out of time by today's standards.
I am not saying that it is bad song. I know that it isn't. I can see why so many people the world over like it so much. However, the sentiment is lost on today's society. Also , the lyrics are extremely repetitive. I think the issue I have with a song like this is that it is much more McCartney and less Lennon. I have to say that I am firmly in the Lennon camp. I read a review once which was talking about Yoko Ono, and it said she always saw McCartney as the Salieri to Lennon's Amadeus. I guess you have to know your Peter Schaffers plays to understand it. I think it sums up my feelings on the matter though.
Lennon wrote this, McCartney didn't
So , it is not really if The Beatles were any good. It is not also about who was the best in the band. Is it still a relevant piece of music to put on in 2011? Does it still actually make any sense? I think this is perhaps why the earlier songs still make sense. People like the innocence of liking boys or girls of the same age. There is something about songs written about courtship, for the want of a better word, that will perhaps always be a bit relevant. Sure, I doubt anyone today aspires just to hold someones hand, but by the same token they understand the meaning of it.
The songs about peace and love and the more cryptic (really?) ones about drugs do not really mean anything to anyone anymore. As Dr Evil says in Austin Powers, peace and love lost. We have moved so far from the idea that if we just love each other everything would be alright. I was part of a discussion today where we were all agreeing that if someone got on the train in a balaclava, you would walk off. Without a second thought. Let it Be , means nothing to us anymore.
That said, if you listened to the first two songs I bet you felt a little bit better. They are happy songs. There is nothing wrong with feeling happy. No matter when the message came from.
Do you think The Beatles matter ? I am interested because so many people rate them so highly. Feel free to comment on the facebook page as well.
Tuesday 29 March 2011
Sunday 27 March 2011
Rock Goddesses
Where are all the rock Goddesses ?
Please do not get offended by the use of the term Goddesses my sisters. It is not meant to be derogatory in any shape or form. Really. But it is a term that is commonly accepted and is easier to use than, suitably empowered musically inclined females, I think you will agree.
Back to the point.
It seems to me that considering women are 52% of the global population that you would expect more of them to venture into music. I realise that in the pop genre there are a lot of women, but this isn't really about pop. This is about the more interesting side of rock, alternative and metal.
Maybe though it is just that they are not making a lot of the best music. As I think about it, it seems that there are more women involved in this scene than you might think.
For example, here is Angela from Arch Enemy,
I think you will agree she is a suitably empowered musically inclined female. I guess though that for a woman to be taken seriously in alternative, metal, indie, she has to be that much further out there than the men. This seems to have been the case from the beginning. Women have fallen into two or three main categories. You get the Folkies, like Carole King, Joni Mitchel, Gillian Welsch, the Pop Chanteuse, think everyone from Diana Ross to Olivia Newton-John to Maddona, Britney, Rhihanna, or the totally insane Rock Chick like Janis Joplin, Joan Jett, Courtney Love, Hayley Williams (Paramore) , Amy Winehouse.
Paramore are my example on this, they make pretty alright music.
That clip has had 40 million hits on you tube. Which is amazing. It says it is from one of the Twilight films and I guess that has added to the popularity. But it is only alright. It is not particularly ground breaking, even that interesting really. It is better than mediocre, but not much. Now , whilst you would have to class Hayley as a rock goddess, she is not as insane as the majority of her sisters. A topless shot on twitter is hardly the stuff of rock excess legend.
A woman who I think possibly leads that bunch is Courtney Love. Has there been a more dangerous woman in music? I am as a rule reasonably difficult to intimidate I like to think, however I am intimidated by Ms Love. her band Hole made some good music.
I do not wish to be uncharitable to Courtney, because having your husband commit suicide must be a life altering moment to say the very least. She is however as far out there as I think it is possible to be. It is not just the drugs, but the outbursts , the stories you hear about the way she attacks people etc. This is of course all done through the media and I doubt very much it has given me a full picture of what I have no doubt is a very intelligent person.
That said, Hole are a good band, not a great band. Even amongst their peers, their music is good, but not great. It is extremely hard for them to be classed in as much esteem as bands like Foo Fighters, Red Hot Chilli Peppers, Soundgarden etc.
Even the mighty Janis. Few would argue with the rating of her voice as being one of the most outstanding. However , whilst the music is good, even touching greatness at times. It consistently falls short of the highest level. Why is this? If you (try admittedly) to take it from a feminist perspective, you could make a good argument for the music industry being traditionally a male based industry. As such pushing women to become that much more of a show than it being about their music. This is fine when you look at Alternative and Indie, metal etc. It however falls pretty flat when you look at the Pop and Folky scene though. Women are coming to dominate pop frankly. Not that it is a bad thing in anyway.
When you look at the way some bands were and are marketed because of their females leads you start to think that there is some strength to the feminst idea of holding women down. Debbie Harry from Blondie was a rock goddess. No doubt. Blondie made some brilliant music. However the way it is presented it was selling the Debbie Harry image first and the music as a secondary concern. Again though, were Blondie the best proponent of their scene? Perhaps not.
Maybe there is hope though. I have recently come into liking Florence and the Machine.
What the hell is that video all about?? I like the song a lot though. It scrapes into alternative doesn't it.
So I guess this is a request, send me your ideas about great music alternative music made by women. Because it has passed me by.
Please do not get offended by the use of the term Goddesses my sisters. It is not meant to be derogatory in any shape or form. Really. But it is a term that is commonly accepted and is easier to use than, suitably empowered musically inclined females, I think you will agree.
Back to the point.
It seems to me that considering women are 52% of the global population that you would expect more of them to venture into music. I realise that in the pop genre there are a lot of women, but this isn't really about pop. This is about the more interesting side of rock, alternative and metal.
Maybe though it is just that they are not making a lot of the best music. As I think about it, it seems that there are more women involved in this scene than you might think.
For example, here is Angela from Arch Enemy,
I think you will agree she is a suitably empowered musically inclined female. I guess though that for a woman to be taken seriously in alternative, metal, indie, she has to be that much further out there than the men. This seems to have been the case from the beginning. Women have fallen into two or three main categories. You get the Folkies, like Carole King, Joni Mitchel, Gillian Welsch, the Pop Chanteuse, think everyone from Diana Ross to Olivia Newton-John to Maddona, Britney, Rhihanna, or the totally insane Rock Chick like Janis Joplin, Joan Jett, Courtney Love, Hayley Williams (Paramore) , Amy Winehouse.
Paramore are my example on this, they make pretty alright music.
That clip has had 40 million hits on you tube. Which is amazing. It says it is from one of the Twilight films and I guess that has added to the popularity. But it is only alright. It is not particularly ground breaking, even that interesting really. It is better than mediocre, but not much. Now , whilst you would have to class Hayley as a rock goddess, she is not as insane as the majority of her sisters. A topless shot on twitter is hardly the stuff of rock excess legend.
A woman who I think possibly leads that bunch is Courtney Love. Has there been a more dangerous woman in music? I am as a rule reasonably difficult to intimidate I like to think, however I am intimidated by Ms Love. her band Hole made some good music.
I do not wish to be uncharitable to Courtney, because having your husband commit suicide must be a life altering moment to say the very least. She is however as far out there as I think it is possible to be. It is not just the drugs, but the outbursts , the stories you hear about the way she attacks people etc. This is of course all done through the media and I doubt very much it has given me a full picture of what I have no doubt is a very intelligent person.
That said, Hole are a good band, not a great band. Even amongst their peers, their music is good, but not great. It is extremely hard for them to be classed in as much esteem as bands like Foo Fighters, Red Hot Chilli Peppers, Soundgarden etc.
Even the mighty Janis. Few would argue with the rating of her voice as being one of the most outstanding. However , whilst the music is good, even touching greatness at times. It consistently falls short of the highest level. Why is this? If you (try admittedly) to take it from a feminist perspective, you could make a good argument for the music industry being traditionally a male based industry. As such pushing women to become that much more of a show than it being about their music. This is fine when you look at Alternative and Indie, metal etc. It however falls pretty flat when you look at the Pop and Folky scene though. Women are coming to dominate pop frankly. Not that it is a bad thing in anyway.
When you look at the way some bands were and are marketed because of their females leads you start to think that there is some strength to the feminst idea of holding women down. Debbie Harry from Blondie was a rock goddess. No doubt. Blondie made some brilliant music. However the way it is presented it was selling the Debbie Harry image first and the music as a secondary concern. Again though, were Blondie the best proponent of their scene? Perhaps not.
Maybe there is hope though. I have recently come into liking Florence and the Machine.
What the hell is that video all about?? I like the song a lot though. It scrapes into alternative doesn't it.
So I guess this is a request, send me your ideas about great music alternative music made by women. Because it has passed me by.
Tuesday 22 March 2011
80s better than the 90s??
One of my Aunts posted a question on facebook, what is your favourite song of the 80s? I think like most people when I see this I immediately think of the cheesy pop songs that are so much associated with the 80s. But then I thought about it, and some of my favourite music is from the 80s. Think about it , Metallica, Guns and Roses, Public Enemy, The Cure.
I finished school in the early 90s and from that time the 80s have been very much maligned in terms of the contribution to the music library. This is to be expected though as the most uncool thing you can be is the thing that was cool two things ago. I also know that I am not the only one who finds the revival of 80s fashion and to some extents the music more than a little ageing and very odd.
You think I am joking??
Regardless of a revival which was better? 80s or the 90s?
Well let's look at those bands that spanned both periods. You have The Cure, with most of their output in the 80s to be fair, but if you compare their two high points. Disintegration and Wish. Well Wish is better, but it is a very close run thing.
Guns and Roses? Undoubtedly, Appetite is better that Use your Illusions. No question. If you do disagree, I need some very strong arguments please.
Metallica, well again this is pretty straightforward. Their first four albums are by far their best work. Even if you throw in the 700 billion selling Black album, it doesn't even come close. Load? Re-load? Please, they are nothing as good as the others.
So then so far the 80s are coming out in front. As I have said on numerous occasions I do not know much about popular music in so far as it occurs in the pop charts. That said , I do know that Michael Jackson at his pomp was better than the Spice Girls, or Alanis Morrisette, The BackStreet boys. Ricky Martin . . . I am sorry but Billy Jean is still a great song. Quincy Jones and Michael Jackson were great together.
Didn't turn out so well did it. Oh well, let's be honest, it wasn't a massive shock really.
I really hated the whole boy band thing. I really hated it. This stopped me listening to the radio until the advent of itunes and internet radio. Think about that for a moment. I write a music blog, clearly reasonably into my music by most standards, and I stopped listening to the best source of new music. I hated the dancing, the impeccable way each one of the four , five or six chaps was chosen exclusively for their look. i.e. this is what teenage girls will go for, at least one of them. Who is to blame for this? New kids on the Block - damn you, damn you to hell .
On a much more interesting theme, the alternative and eventually the mainstream were far far more interesting. In the 80s, you have Janes Addiction. Husker Du, Fugazi, The Smiths , Dead Kennedys. and The Pixies in the 80s.
In the 90s you have , Nirvana, Alice in Chains, Soundgarden, The Smashing Pumpkins, the Tea Party, Stone Temple Pilots, Radiohead and of course the mighty, mighty Tool.
Tool videos take some getting used to.
I would put it this way for the comparison. The 80s music was more avant guard. There was more going on in a lot of it. One thing I notice is that while a lot of the bands I listed from the 80s were properly alternative the ones I listed for the 90s were very much part of the mainstream. In so far as the mainstream involves selling a lot of albums.
Although it is interesting that despite how big they all were, none of them had the biggest selling album of a year. It shows that no matter how big you think something is, there are a whole lot of people out there buying the music I am not so fond of. I guess this makes me alternative, although looking at the list above that came off the top of my head, I don't think I am that alternative.
Perhaps the point is though, that a lot of people were able to experiment a lot more in the 80s. Much more than in the 90s when the music machine really took over. It was not until the advent of the torrent and bit sites that the people took the music back.
The 90s was a terrible time for metal, which was a pity. It was better for the angst ridden alternative rock. It did however lack the free spirit nature of 80s. Everything seemed a lot more serious when it comes to looking back on it all. Perhaps the world was a more serious place and the music reflected this? That could just be me though.
Which was better? well depends what mood you were in.
Sometimes a laugh
Sometimes a cry
Any thoughts?
I finished school in the early 90s and from that time the 80s have been very much maligned in terms of the contribution to the music library. This is to be expected though as the most uncool thing you can be is the thing that was cool two things ago. I also know that I am not the only one who finds the revival of 80s fashion and to some extents the music more than a little ageing and very odd.
You think I am joking??
Regardless of a revival which was better? 80s or the 90s?
Well let's look at those bands that spanned both periods. You have The Cure, with most of their output in the 80s to be fair, but if you compare their two high points. Disintegration and Wish. Well Wish is better, but it is a very close run thing.
Guns and Roses? Undoubtedly, Appetite is better that Use your Illusions. No question. If you do disagree, I need some very strong arguments please.
Metallica, well again this is pretty straightforward. Their first four albums are by far their best work. Even if you throw in the 700 billion selling Black album, it doesn't even come close. Load? Re-load? Please, they are nothing as good as the others.
So then so far the 80s are coming out in front. As I have said on numerous occasions I do not know much about popular music in so far as it occurs in the pop charts. That said , I do know that Michael Jackson at his pomp was better than the Spice Girls, or Alanis Morrisette, The BackStreet boys. Ricky Martin . . . I am sorry but Billy Jean is still a great song. Quincy Jones and Michael Jackson were great together.
Didn't turn out so well did it. Oh well, let's be honest, it wasn't a massive shock really.
I really hated the whole boy band thing. I really hated it. This stopped me listening to the radio until the advent of itunes and internet radio. Think about that for a moment. I write a music blog, clearly reasonably into my music by most standards, and I stopped listening to the best source of new music. I hated the dancing, the impeccable way each one of the four , five or six chaps was chosen exclusively for their look. i.e. this is what teenage girls will go for, at least one of them. Who is to blame for this? New kids on the Block - damn you, damn you to hell .
On a much more interesting theme, the alternative and eventually the mainstream were far far more interesting. In the 80s, you have Janes Addiction. Husker Du, Fugazi, The Smiths , Dead Kennedys. and The Pixies in the 80s.
In the 90s you have , Nirvana, Alice in Chains, Soundgarden, The Smashing Pumpkins, the Tea Party, Stone Temple Pilots, Radiohead and of course the mighty, mighty Tool.
Tool videos take some getting used to.
I would put it this way for the comparison. The 80s music was more avant guard. There was more going on in a lot of it. One thing I notice is that while a lot of the bands I listed from the 80s were properly alternative the ones I listed for the 90s were very much part of the mainstream. In so far as the mainstream involves selling a lot of albums.
Although it is interesting that despite how big they all were, none of them had the biggest selling album of a year. It shows that no matter how big you think something is, there are a whole lot of people out there buying the music I am not so fond of. I guess this makes me alternative, although looking at the list above that came off the top of my head, I don't think I am that alternative.
Perhaps the point is though, that a lot of people were able to experiment a lot more in the 80s. Much more than in the 90s when the music machine really took over. It was not until the advent of the torrent and bit sites that the people took the music back.
The 90s was a terrible time for metal, which was a pity. It was better for the angst ridden alternative rock. It did however lack the free spirit nature of 80s. Everything seemed a lot more serious when it comes to looking back on it all. Perhaps the world was a more serious place and the music reflected this? That could just be me though.
Which was better? well depends what mood you were in.
Sometimes a laugh
Sometimes a cry
Any thoughts?
Saturday 19 March 2011
What happened to car music?
I have little to no trouble in admitting that I am not really down with the kids. I do not listen to the latest chart topping hits as most of the music is really not for me. I mean that in both senses of the phrase, it isn't for me because I don't like it, and it isn't aimed at me. When Lily Allen is singing she is not thinking about an almost middle aged person.
That's fine, I am cool with that. Given I might not have heard the latest greatest thing to come out of the mouth of some factory produced starlet, it does seem to me that there is a whole genre of songs that has disappeared. Where are the songs about cars? Cars have gotten a lot better, but the music about them has gone. Vanished.
Pure and simple - a guy singing about his car. Bragging about how good it is. Nothing earth shattering there. it seems it was big in the 60s and even into the 70s to talk about how cool your car is.
Another example by Deep Purple.
I am never quite sure what I think of Deep Purple. They are one of those bands whenever I hear them I think that I quite like them, but I never seek out their music. Their greatest hits albums are brilliant, some of their actual albums tend to disappear into a progtastic guitar and organ fest. Perhaps that is what puts me off them a little bit, the organ. Does an organ have a place in hard rock? Not sure, it is not bad , but organ solos? maybe not. Still Deep purple are good. Deepest Purple is a good 'Best Of' to have.
So I started looking around for more modern songs about cars. It is hard, they are certainly not in the mainstream. As with so many other things in life, you need to turn to Sir Mix-A-Lot for the answer to your questions:
That is a fairly ordinary song, but the genius of it is to get all of the car names into the rap so seamlessly. Seems Baby Got Back was a bigger hit than we all thought. Most of those cars are actually his according to the sites talking about it.
Rob Zombie emerges as an unlikely saviour?
I have posted about Rob Zombie before, I think that he is a genius, but that is not a great car song as far as things go.
So why have the car songs disappeared from our musical lexicon? People drive more than ever and there is little doubt that man's (sorry ladies it is a guy thing isn't it) love of the auto has if anything, increased. I think that it has to have something to do with the increasingly disposable nature of our relationship to the world. We no longer seem to cherish our relationship with the machines that we have. Especially with cars. Cars have become another tool for us to use. Not an object of deeper emotions. As our roads have become more clogged, much more stringently policed, it seems we take less and less enjoyment in our driving experiences.
This is a great pity. Depending on the kind of person you are, one of the great experiences of life is the road trip. A long drive through the countryside. Music blaring with cool tunes and following the road to where it takes you. As I have said before I grew up in Australia and there is a lot of space over there. You put tunes on and drive through the desert ,comparatively speaking , ok scrubland then. I wonder why a desert seems to be cooler to me. I guess there is the element of it being unpopulated.
So what is the best driving song?
Golden Earring are somewhat ironically Dutch. Not a great place for driving, Holland. Still a great song to listen to whilst driving. I am going to do a playlist blog about driving I think.
What do you like to listen to whilst driving?
That's fine, I am cool with that. Given I might not have heard the latest greatest thing to come out of the mouth of some factory produced starlet, it does seem to me that there is a whole genre of songs that has disappeared. Where are the songs about cars? Cars have gotten a lot better, but the music about them has gone. Vanished.
Pure and simple - a guy singing about his car. Bragging about how good it is. Nothing earth shattering there. it seems it was big in the 60s and even into the 70s to talk about how cool your car is.
Another example by Deep Purple.
I am never quite sure what I think of Deep Purple. They are one of those bands whenever I hear them I think that I quite like them, but I never seek out their music. Their greatest hits albums are brilliant, some of their actual albums tend to disappear into a progtastic guitar and organ fest. Perhaps that is what puts me off them a little bit, the organ. Does an organ have a place in hard rock? Not sure, it is not bad , but organ solos? maybe not. Still Deep purple are good. Deepest Purple is a good 'Best Of' to have.
So I started looking around for more modern songs about cars. It is hard, they are certainly not in the mainstream. As with so many other things in life, you need to turn to Sir Mix-A-Lot for the answer to your questions:
That is a fairly ordinary song, but the genius of it is to get all of the car names into the rap so seamlessly. Seems Baby Got Back was a bigger hit than we all thought. Most of those cars are actually his according to the sites talking about it.
Rob Zombie emerges as an unlikely saviour?
I have posted about Rob Zombie before, I think that he is a genius, but that is not a great car song as far as things go.
So why have the car songs disappeared from our musical lexicon? People drive more than ever and there is little doubt that man's (sorry ladies it is a guy thing isn't it) love of the auto has if anything, increased. I think that it has to have something to do with the increasingly disposable nature of our relationship to the world. We no longer seem to cherish our relationship with the machines that we have. Especially with cars. Cars have become another tool for us to use. Not an object of deeper emotions. As our roads have become more clogged, much more stringently policed, it seems we take less and less enjoyment in our driving experiences.
This is a great pity. Depending on the kind of person you are, one of the great experiences of life is the road trip. A long drive through the countryside. Music blaring with cool tunes and following the road to where it takes you. As I have said before I grew up in Australia and there is a lot of space over there. You put tunes on and drive through the desert ,comparatively speaking , ok scrubland then. I wonder why a desert seems to be cooler to me. I guess there is the element of it being unpopulated.
So what is the best driving song?
Golden Earring are somewhat ironically Dutch. Not a great place for driving, Holland. Still a great song to listen to whilst driving. I am going to do a playlist blog about driving I think.
What do you like to listen to whilst driving?
Wednesday 16 March 2011
But does it define you?
A person that wants to remain anonymous asked me the question whether or not I thought the music that I like defines me as a person. I think this is a very interesting question. Do I think that I am defined by the music that I like, love, admire?
I guess it really depends on what you think the word define means. I think in many instances the word would mean to explain, to put in a way which explains it's subject matter. There is also an element of being succinct about it that define brings to mind. So if I am looking for music to explain me, then surely it must be music that i relate to? More than I like.
For example, I like and have always liked this song by Ice-T
I would however be somewhat delusional if I thought that there was a modicum of truth in it defining me as a person. Not being a famous musician and never having to deal with any of the descriptive day in the life that he puts together so well.
This being the case then it would have to be a song that might describe what i thought was my state of mind. If a song can not describe my life then it must be something a little less tangible than the cold hard reality of it all. This then becomes a very interesting issue. Because there is no doubt that there are songs that have described my state of mind very well at a particular time.
For example, the cold and somewhat detached fury of this song by Radiohead
I think that this song was very good at describing how i felt about certain situations. I love the echo effect, and as always Thom Yorke's lyrics seem to capture the isolation quite well. The way the line
"you and your cronies" immediately puts all of the associated people except the subject of the song into a secondary and inferior position in his mind. That is extremely effective and the way the song soars momentarily as if he was trying to control the anger and losing the battle for a moment.
However, before you get the impression that i am a slightly deranged serial killer, this song has also described my mood a number of times
The sentiment of the song, have some bad fun, whatever bad fun may mean. I like that a lot and have often listened to this song prior to going out to put me in the mood to be prepared to accept whatever the night may have in store for me. i love the line
"mayhem children take no lip
rev your engines from the hip"
There is a definite sense of not only being a little bit dangerous but also a little bit fired up and cocky.
i think I am getting closer to the point here. There are songs that can help you to define yourself in a mood. There are however an almost limitless combination of moods that you may be in at any one time and as such , a single song to define you is impossible. Unless of course you wrote the song. Could you write a song that defined you , and would you be happy with it. I can't say, I have written to lyrics to songs that never got sung, but I have not ever written the music, so i wouldn't know. If you have then please comment.
There are also some songs that attempt to describe a general state of being
listen to this by perennial favourite The Bravery
Maybe that describes the lyricist? maybe someone he knows? It doesn't describe my life, but I do think it is a very good song and I am very sure that must describe and even define a lot of people's lives.
The other bit about music defining you could also be the fact that hearing a song from the past reminds you of a particular time and place. Usually a particularly good or bad time and place. You know what I mean, a Holiday, a Funeral, the time you got fired, or when you met your partner etc . I think this really comes back to mood though doesn't it. You had a particular mood at the time and as such whatever you heard either connected with you, or really didn't. So when you hear the music again it brings back those memories.
So, Anon from somewhere on the planet, no my music taste doesn't define me. It describes my moods to me through other peoples interpretation of their moods. I have a lot of moods and so you would need to have a very large collection of songs that I like in one place before I would be happy about saying they came to describe the moods I have.
I guess this must be the same for all music lovers, although I do wonder what people who don't love music do, maybe it comes up in colours?
I guess it really depends on what you think the word define means. I think in many instances the word would mean to explain, to put in a way which explains it's subject matter. There is also an element of being succinct about it that define brings to mind. So if I am looking for music to explain me, then surely it must be music that i relate to? More than I like.
For example, I like and have always liked this song by Ice-T
I would however be somewhat delusional if I thought that there was a modicum of truth in it defining me as a person. Not being a famous musician and never having to deal with any of the descriptive day in the life that he puts together so well.
This being the case then it would have to be a song that might describe what i thought was my state of mind. If a song can not describe my life then it must be something a little less tangible than the cold hard reality of it all. This then becomes a very interesting issue. Because there is no doubt that there are songs that have described my state of mind very well at a particular time.
For example, the cold and somewhat detached fury of this song by Radiohead
I think that this song was very good at describing how i felt about certain situations. I love the echo effect, and as always Thom Yorke's lyrics seem to capture the isolation quite well. The way the line
"you and your cronies" immediately puts all of the associated people except the subject of the song into a secondary and inferior position in his mind. That is extremely effective and the way the song soars momentarily as if he was trying to control the anger and losing the battle for a moment.
However, before you get the impression that i am a slightly deranged serial killer, this song has also described my mood a number of times
The sentiment of the song, have some bad fun, whatever bad fun may mean. I like that a lot and have often listened to this song prior to going out to put me in the mood to be prepared to accept whatever the night may have in store for me. i love the line
"mayhem children take no lip
rev your engines from the hip"
There is a definite sense of not only being a little bit dangerous but also a little bit fired up and cocky.
i think I am getting closer to the point here. There are songs that can help you to define yourself in a mood. There are however an almost limitless combination of moods that you may be in at any one time and as such , a single song to define you is impossible. Unless of course you wrote the song. Could you write a song that defined you , and would you be happy with it. I can't say, I have written to lyrics to songs that never got sung, but I have not ever written the music, so i wouldn't know. If you have then please comment.
There are also some songs that attempt to describe a general state of being
listen to this by perennial favourite The Bravery
Maybe that describes the lyricist? maybe someone he knows? It doesn't describe my life, but I do think it is a very good song and I am very sure that must describe and even define a lot of people's lives.
The other bit about music defining you could also be the fact that hearing a song from the past reminds you of a particular time and place. Usually a particularly good or bad time and place. You know what I mean, a Holiday, a Funeral, the time you got fired, or when you met your partner etc . I think this really comes back to mood though doesn't it. You had a particular mood at the time and as such whatever you heard either connected with you, or really didn't. So when you hear the music again it brings back those memories.
So, Anon from somewhere on the planet, no my music taste doesn't define me. It describes my moods to me through other peoples interpretation of their moods. I have a lot of moods and so you would need to have a very large collection of songs that I like in one place before I would be happy about saying they came to describe the moods I have.
I guess this must be the same for all music lovers, although I do wonder what people who don't love music do, maybe it comes up in colours?
Sunday 13 March 2011
What's appropriate? part II
You know maybe this song by Placebo sums up the reaction to the Earthquake and the feeling from us to the natural events
see here for some other thoughts on what music would be appropriate .
see here for some other thoughts on what music would be appropriate .
Saturday 12 March 2011
What's appropriate?
Recently it seems that the earth is showing the little humans who is boss. This is of course a reasonably ridiculous notion, and leads to perhaps the scariest thing for us to face. The earth, if it was a sentient being, does not care one way or another about us. Mother nature is not a kind a nurturing being, but a completely indifferent one.
The floods in Australia, the earthquake in New Zealand and yesterday the quake and Tsunami in Japan. My heart goes to everyone who has been effected by these recent natural events. I lived in Japan for 6 years, and Tokyo remains my favourite place in the world. All of my friends and associates are OK, but there are so many people who can not say this.
The pictures of the Tsunami racing across the countryside and through the towns was, if you have seen, i think you will agree one of the most amazing and frightening pieces of film footage ever seen.
I have often said that there is music that suits every occasion. But what is appropriate in this case? As the Japanese follow the Australians and New Zealanders into the clean up phase after a disaster what would be appropriate? What is it appropriate for us to listen to?
There is what I think an instinctive part of human nature that says it is going to be ok. Is it there for appropriate to play this by the beach boys?
You know , it probably isn't ok. The song is about a relationship, and why that is perhaps the most important thing in a time of crisis, the flippancy of it doesn't make sense now. So where do you go? This is most definitely not a time for flippancy. Is it a time for humour? Please do not misunderstand I am not suggesting that this is something to make a joke out of, not at all. But, humour is a natural human response to the most tragic of circumstance and so maybe it is appropriate now?
I don't know, that isn't a particularly funny song, but it does change the topic at least. Perhaps that is the point.
There is also the option to get angry. That is often the way that people deal with things. Vent the wrath at the unfairness of it. Because it is unfair. there is nothing that is fair about being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Throughout human history we have tried to explain this away through the elements of religion, through the explanation of others that there is some sort of divine retribution. Why? because it makes it easier for us to deal with the fact that the universe is unloving and unjust.
You could of course go the other way and go into the most serious songs. Jeff Buckley's Hallelujah? people play this song at lot at funerals.
It is however a very personal song, and while I understand that if you had been directly effected by any of the disasters then it would be appropriate. However, while I know a lot of people that have been, I have not been directly effected and as such I feel that I am almost intruding by listening to this and trying to imagine how it must feel. Is there a song that is able to convey this? at least to me? There have been some attempts at it. There was We are the World, which was a noble effort. It was done to raise funds for the relief in Africa after that continent went through one of the many natural events that cause great human misery and upheaval.
The sentiment is correct , but it is a song of hope and togetherness, something that is definitely needed. But it doesn't describe, metaphorically, the human element of the disaster.
But I don't know if there is a song that does it. I don't have the right song for this.
sorry
The floods in Australia, the earthquake in New Zealand and yesterday the quake and Tsunami in Japan. My heart goes to everyone who has been effected by these recent natural events. I lived in Japan for 6 years, and Tokyo remains my favourite place in the world. All of my friends and associates are OK, but there are so many people who can not say this.
The pictures of the Tsunami racing across the countryside and through the towns was, if you have seen, i think you will agree one of the most amazing and frightening pieces of film footage ever seen.
I have often said that there is music that suits every occasion. But what is appropriate in this case? As the Japanese follow the Australians and New Zealanders into the clean up phase after a disaster what would be appropriate? What is it appropriate for us to listen to?
There is what I think an instinctive part of human nature that says it is going to be ok. Is it there for appropriate to play this by the beach boys?
You know , it probably isn't ok. The song is about a relationship, and why that is perhaps the most important thing in a time of crisis, the flippancy of it doesn't make sense now. So where do you go? This is most definitely not a time for flippancy. Is it a time for humour? Please do not misunderstand I am not suggesting that this is something to make a joke out of, not at all. But, humour is a natural human response to the most tragic of circumstance and so maybe it is appropriate now?
I don't know, that isn't a particularly funny song, but it does change the topic at least. Perhaps that is the point.
There is also the option to get angry. That is often the way that people deal with things. Vent the wrath at the unfairness of it. Because it is unfair. there is nothing that is fair about being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Throughout human history we have tried to explain this away through the elements of religion, through the explanation of others that there is some sort of divine retribution. Why? because it makes it easier for us to deal with the fact that the universe is unloving and unjust.
You could of course go the other way and go into the most serious songs. Jeff Buckley's Hallelujah? people play this song at lot at funerals.
It is however a very personal song, and while I understand that if you had been directly effected by any of the disasters then it would be appropriate. However, while I know a lot of people that have been, I have not been directly effected and as such I feel that I am almost intruding by listening to this and trying to imagine how it must feel. Is there a song that is able to convey this? at least to me? There have been some attempts at it. There was We are the World, which was a noble effort. It was done to raise funds for the relief in Africa after that continent went through one of the many natural events that cause great human misery and upheaval.
The sentiment is correct , but it is a song of hope and togetherness, something that is definitely needed. But it doesn't describe, metaphorically, the human element of the disaster.
But I don't know if there is a song that does it. I don't have the right song for this.
sorry
Wednesday 9 March 2011
America vs Britain
I had a conversation with a friend who has past by the way side many years ago about the relative merits of the music that comes from America and the music that has come from Britain.
His comment was that since The Beatles and The Stones there has not been anything that the Brits could rightly say came from British shores. I have wondered about this ever since, I have wondered about other things as well , but this has stuck in the mind. Is it right? Does everything come from America? If so does that mean that all the good music comes from America, on the idea that everything that is not an original idea is derivative and therefore a pale imitation of the original. Well certainly in the case of U2 this is true, but does it hold generally?
If we take the beginning of rock and roll and compare over time , how does each country fare?
Well America gave us Jazz, and it gave us the Blues. In so far as traditional music evolved into the terms that we know. No one really came up with the blues is my point. There wasn't a genesis moment and everyone went , wow , that must be called Blues. It became the form that we know in America though. There is a commonly held perception that the British took the blues and turned them into Rock and Roll.
Which is rubbish. Rock and Roll in it's infancy is Chuck Berry
it is Little Richard
I properly love that video. The big guy can dance. Nothing of any real interest came from this period from the UK. The Shadows maybe. I know that this is a gross implification, But i want to talk about the more interesting music.
The British took blues and took this rock and roll and came up with The Beatles, the Yardbirds, Cream, Traffic etc. Definitely a huge time for British music.
Do you know this song by Traffic? This is awesome
or this one? Which is blind faith which is Steve Winwood and Eric clapton and Ginger baker (from Cream)
Anyway the point being that the British had it at this stage. It really was very British at the time. The Americans fought back quickly though with The Doors, The Beach Boys. not to mention the whole pyschadelic scene, Janis Joplin. this is a great song by Janis.
That is a live performance. Imagine those little people on Pop idol being able to actually sing like that. That said I think you would have to give the late 60s to the Brits. Very hard to come up with an argument as to why not.
The 70s is a difficult one to call. On one side of the fence you have Pink Floyd, on the other you have The Eagles.You have Tom Petty and Bruce Springsteen, i will write more about Bruce, but listen to this song and tell me he isn't cool
That said though, the Brits had Led Zeppelin, Sabbath, David Bowie, Elvis Costello, The Clash, Iron Maiden.
This is a great maiden song. I know a lot of people are not massively into maiden, but this was taken in Mumbai, you can feel the crowd excitement as the concert opens
OK so the Brits take the 70s. also let's not forget the Americans invented disco. You know they had I hate disco rallies and burnt disco records in baseball stadiums full of people? Can you imagine that level of unification about music now? Very funny laughing at it now. But people really believed in it. I found a disco sucks t-shirt which I have lost somewhere. They had t-shirts!
It takes a very patriotic Brit to claim the 80s though. Honestly, there was some great music in the 80s coming from Britain, The Cure, the Smiths, The Cult , starting to struggle here. Madness. Plus let's not forget all the new Romantics, like Duran Duran , Echo and the Bunnymen, and the start of electronic music proper with Human League, Gary Numan, haircut 100, however
From the Americans you have, Guns and Roses, Public Enemy, Ice-T, Ice Cube, Janes Addiction, Metallica, Slayer, Husker Du, The Pixies, Dead Kennedys, De La Soul, and this is before we mention , the hair bands, Michael Jackson, and the proper beginning of modern hip hop.
I love that song. it makes you want to dance. dance like a white guy whose had too much to drink and has too much to prove.
So , it is about a tie now. Which is interesting.
So the Nineties, well it looks reasonably close on paper. You have grunge, you have brit pop, You have the electronic breakthrough into the mainstream. Scratch a little deeper though and it becomes clear this is another pretty clear victory for the Americans. You have , Nirvana , Pearl Jam, Alice in Chains, beck, Beastie Boys ( i know technically 80s but their best work is 90s) Dj Shadow, Smashing Pumpkins, Tool, Rob Zombie. Eninem, tu pac, Notorious BIG, Sir mix alot, Sonic youth. I have had a lot of trouble picking a song by any of these artists because there are simply so many great songs to choose from.
But here is AIC, because today it was announced that Mike Smith, the bassist, died. RIP
The brits had some very good music in this period as well. Sure there was Oasis, Blur, Suede, but there was also Massive Attack, Aphex twin, Radiohead (who span two decades) The Cure (again) , The Prodigy, therapy? , the mighty Boards of Canada (they're Scottish), Stone Roses, but when it comes down to it, you have to say that the Americans have it. Which poses a question in itself. Is it a coincidence that both countries have a back to back victory? Obviously it is just my opinion awarding the points here, so it is very subjective. You may want to claim that the inspired music of the mega couple Bobby Brown and Whitney makes all other arguments obsolete. I would have to ask you to leave, but you are entitled to your opinion.
The point being that maybe because so much good music came before that it inspired the very next generation and a half to greater heights. Maybe they identified more with the musicians and as such found it easier. Maybe not though. Because look what happened in the 80s to British music. Can the same be said of the 00s and American music?
Well, not really. As I have said time again, the digital revolution has changed the playing ground a great deal. The advent of Internet radio has meant that much more than before you can listen to anything. Really, I am listening to a New York radio station as i write this and this is pretty normal. What does it mean for the great intercontinental fight we are discussing here? Well not much really, as it seems that this is a pretty even fight.
On the British side we have Radiohead (again) Artic Monkeys, these guys are far better than you think. Listen to this,
We also get, Primal Scream, The Libertines, Amy Winehouse (it is a good album even if she is a mess) , Dizzee Rascal
Then on the American side you have, The White Stripes, Queens of the Stone Age, Foo Fighters, Outkast, The Shins, Interpol, The Bravery, My Chemical Romance, (yes i am a fan)
The list does go on almost endlessly, but which is better? it is hard to argue against either on this front. We have had an overwhelming run of American music in the last 15 years. Everyone wants to be African American and sing what is now called RnB. I thought honestly that RnB was Roberta Flack, not Rhianna. Still what do i know?
I know that giving it a tie is a cop out. But i honestly think that neither is a clear winner here. Which rather annoying makes it 2.5 all. So maybe my mate was wrong.
As a footnote, i wish to apologise for all of the brilliant music I have left out. But there is only so much I can put into a post. Also to those bands who changed our lives and didn't come from either place. Well done, we love you even more just for that!!
His comment was that since The Beatles and The Stones there has not been anything that the Brits could rightly say came from British shores. I have wondered about this ever since, I have wondered about other things as well , but this has stuck in the mind. Is it right? Does everything come from America? If so does that mean that all the good music comes from America, on the idea that everything that is not an original idea is derivative and therefore a pale imitation of the original. Well certainly in the case of U2 this is true, but does it hold generally?
If we take the beginning of rock and roll and compare over time , how does each country fare?
Well America gave us Jazz, and it gave us the Blues. In so far as traditional music evolved into the terms that we know. No one really came up with the blues is my point. There wasn't a genesis moment and everyone went , wow , that must be called Blues. It became the form that we know in America though. There is a commonly held perception that the British took the blues and turned them into Rock and Roll.
Which is rubbish. Rock and Roll in it's infancy is Chuck Berry
it is Little Richard
I properly love that video. The big guy can dance. Nothing of any real interest came from this period from the UK. The Shadows maybe. I know that this is a gross implification, But i want to talk about the more interesting music.
The British took blues and took this rock and roll and came up with The Beatles, the Yardbirds, Cream, Traffic etc. Definitely a huge time for British music.
Do you know this song by Traffic? This is awesome
or this one? Which is blind faith which is Steve Winwood and Eric clapton and Ginger baker (from Cream)
Anyway the point being that the British had it at this stage. It really was very British at the time. The Americans fought back quickly though with The Doors, The Beach Boys. not to mention the whole pyschadelic scene, Janis Joplin. this is a great song by Janis.
That is a live performance. Imagine those little people on Pop idol being able to actually sing like that. That said I think you would have to give the late 60s to the Brits. Very hard to come up with an argument as to why not.
The 70s is a difficult one to call. On one side of the fence you have Pink Floyd, on the other you have The Eagles.You have Tom Petty and Bruce Springsteen, i will write more about Bruce, but listen to this song and tell me he isn't cool
That said though, the Brits had Led Zeppelin, Sabbath, David Bowie, Elvis Costello, The Clash, Iron Maiden.
This is a great maiden song. I know a lot of people are not massively into maiden, but this was taken in Mumbai, you can feel the crowd excitement as the concert opens
OK so the Brits take the 70s. also let's not forget the Americans invented disco. You know they had I hate disco rallies and burnt disco records in baseball stadiums full of people? Can you imagine that level of unification about music now? Very funny laughing at it now. But people really believed in it. I found a disco sucks t-shirt which I have lost somewhere. They had t-shirts!
It takes a very patriotic Brit to claim the 80s though. Honestly, there was some great music in the 80s coming from Britain, The Cure, the Smiths, The Cult , starting to struggle here. Madness. Plus let's not forget all the new Romantics, like Duran Duran , Echo and the Bunnymen, and the start of electronic music proper with Human League, Gary Numan, haircut 100, however
From the Americans you have, Guns and Roses, Public Enemy, Ice-T, Ice Cube, Janes Addiction, Metallica, Slayer, Husker Du, The Pixies, Dead Kennedys, De La Soul, and this is before we mention , the hair bands, Michael Jackson, and the proper beginning of modern hip hop.
I love that song. it makes you want to dance. dance like a white guy whose had too much to drink and has too much to prove.
So , it is about a tie now. Which is interesting.
So the Nineties, well it looks reasonably close on paper. You have grunge, you have brit pop, You have the electronic breakthrough into the mainstream. Scratch a little deeper though and it becomes clear this is another pretty clear victory for the Americans. You have , Nirvana , Pearl Jam, Alice in Chains, beck, Beastie Boys ( i know technically 80s but their best work is 90s) Dj Shadow, Smashing Pumpkins, Tool, Rob Zombie. Eninem, tu pac, Notorious BIG, Sir mix alot, Sonic youth. I have had a lot of trouble picking a song by any of these artists because there are simply so many great songs to choose from.
But here is AIC, because today it was announced that Mike Smith, the bassist, died. RIP
The brits had some very good music in this period as well. Sure there was Oasis, Blur, Suede, but there was also Massive Attack, Aphex twin, Radiohead (who span two decades) The Cure (again) , The Prodigy, therapy? , the mighty Boards of Canada (they're Scottish), Stone Roses, but when it comes down to it, you have to say that the Americans have it. Which poses a question in itself. Is it a coincidence that both countries have a back to back victory? Obviously it is just my opinion awarding the points here, so it is very subjective. You may want to claim that the inspired music of the mega couple Bobby Brown and Whitney makes all other arguments obsolete. I would have to ask you to leave, but you are entitled to your opinion.
The point being that maybe because so much good music came before that it inspired the very next generation and a half to greater heights. Maybe they identified more with the musicians and as such found it easier. Maybe not though. Because look what happened in the 80s to British music. Can the same be said of the 00s and American music?
Well, not really. As I have said time again, the digital revolution has changed the playing ground a great deal. The advent of Internet radio has meant that much more than before you can listen to anything. Really, I am listening to a New York radio station as i write this and this is pretty normal. What does it mean for the great intercontinental fight we are discussing here? Well not much really, as it seems that this is a pretty even fight.
On the British side we have Radiohead (again) Artic Monkeys, these guys are far better than you think. Listen to this,
We also get, Primal Scream, The Libertines, Amy Winehouse (it is a good album even if she is a mess) , Dizzee Rascal
Then on the American side you have, The White Stripes, Queens of the Stone Age, Foo Fighters, Outkast, The Shins, Interpol, The Bravery, My Chemical Romance, (yes i am a fan)
The list does go on almost endlessly, but which is better? it is hard to argue against either on this front. We have had an overwhelming run of American music in the last 15 years. Everyone wants to be African American and sing what is now called RnB. I thought honestly that RnB was Roberta Flack, not Rhianna. Still what do i know?
I know that giving it a tie is a cop out. But i honestly think that neither is a clear winner here. Which rather annoying makes it 2.5 all. So maybe my mate was wrong.
As a footnote, i wish to apologise for all of the brilliant music I have left out. But there is only so much I can put into a post. Also to those bands who changed our lives and didn't come from either place. Well done, we love you even more just for that!!
Friday 4 March 2011
Music ruminations: getting old
Music ruminations: getting old: "One of the things that I have noticed about myself lately is that i am spending a lot of time writing about what must be considered old musi..."
getting old
One of the things that I have noticed about myself lately is that i am spending a lot of time writing about what must be considered old music. This is not something that i thought much about before i started to write this blog.
I have always been reasonably proud that my love of music has always meant that i like to listen to new things as much as possible.
But I will admit to have a crisis in confidence here. Maybe i am not that into new music. Maybe I am turning into one of those people that only likes music from when i was younger. Maybe I would be that person that only talks about bands that was cool when I was a lot cooler than i am now. Looking back to a halcyon age of music as I see it.
I am also going to have to admit that this is something that has worried me from a young age. i saw my parents and many other people hang onto the music of their youth like an obsessive limpet. I always thought it was a bit depressing. Imagine the fact that you had already heard the best song you were ever going to hear. The best album now, was probably the best album you were going to hear as well.
I can not decide is that means you should bask in the glory of knowing your favourite music, or it sucks balls
There is nothing wrong with knowing what you like and sticking to it. The obvious other side of the argument is that if you try to be something you are not then by any modern standard of being real to yourself you have failed. The idea that you like new things just because they are new is as bad as not liking things because they are new. the ying for the yang as it were.
So we try and sit in the middle of an extreme view. We like the music we like and hope that sometimes more than often we will like new things that are released.
I have said before that I think the concept of what is new music has changed in the last 5 to 7 years. The digital revolution has meant that it may just be new to you. If it is new to you then when does it matter when it was released? In this post i said that I quite liked the lady gaga song. This is very much a fad. I do not necessarily mean that from my perspective that liking lady gaga is a fad. Although that is also true to an extent. What i mean is that Lady Gaga's music is not revolutionary in any sense of the word. It is not anything more than the latest thing. She is the Madonna, Britney, Pink type of character for the last couple of years. She will release a couple of albums and then more than likely fade into the background. Her next album will do extremely well, but will alienate many of her original fans. Her antics will become more and more outrageous until we are bored by the dancing bear.
It does not bother me in the slightest that i feel no connection to this. What bothers me is that by forever going backwards and finding lost classics that i will miss something truly great. You know something though. i am not so sure I have missed anything lately. has there been a truly seminal album in the last few years? Has there been something that was completely unmissable? Something we all had to have that united us all in the love of music? Was there an album that made everyone go, you know, i don't usually like this kind of music , but I love that album?
I did a quick search using the somewhat ubiquitous google for the best albums of the 2000s. Now I know i am not going to find the answers to life's mysteries using google. However, This is it, by the strokes came up a lot.
this was the main song from that album
I have to post a live version as apparently copyright has blocked it in my country. Which is odd. However, it is a good song and a good album. Is a great album. Well no, it isn't. in fact it does not compare to great albums very favourably.
That said a band that deserve a lot more accolades for making great music are Interpol. Interpol are fucking brilliant. Sorry about the language, but I feel quite strongly about this. if there was a band that i would say stood above all of the other dross on the 2000s , it would be Interpol. A band that have a song called, There's no I in threesome. Has there been a better song title? Listen to the lyrics of the song. Actually listen to them this time
Not only slightly humours title, but a somewhat haunting song in the isolation it brings to the party.
What else was there? Well there was Queens of the Stone age. I know, they are pretty good. There was The White Stripes, There was The Shins. I don't know about the shins. I like there music a lot at times. I rarely hear a song come on shuffle and think to myself, wow that is special.
Hear is song that deserves to be called truly great
You had to be into Slipknot to find that song. That is an amazing song. i mean truly brilliant.
Dangermouse . . .or in this incarnation gnarls barkley
As the man says
"yeah out there I was out of touch
but it wasn't because i didn't know enough
I just knew too much"
Maybe that's the issue.
Don't worry , I am not trying to suggest i know too much. But maybe ,, because there is so much choice that sometimes, things get hidden or forgotten. Going back to them means you perhaps give them a better listen this time around. You know, maybe I am not so old after all.
I have always been reasonably proud that my love of music has always meant that i like to listen to new things as much as possible.
But I will admit to have a crisis in confidence here. Maybe i am not that into new music. Maybe I am turning into one of those people that only likes music from when i was younger. Maybe I would be that person that only talks about bands that was cool when I was a lot cooler than i am now. Looking back to a halcyon age of music as I see it.
I am also going to have to admit that this is something that has worried me from a young age. i saw my parents and many other people hang onto the music of their youth like an obsessive limpet. I always thought it was a bit depressing. Imagine the fact that you had already heard the best song you were ever going to hear. The best album now, was probably the best album you were going to hear as well.
I can not decide is that means you should bask in the glory of knowing your favourite music, or it sucks balls
There is nothing wrong with knowing what you like and sticking to it. The obvious other side of the argument is that if you try to be something you are not then by any modern standard of being real to yourself you have failed. The idea that you like new things just because they are new is as bad as not liking things because they are new. the ying for the yang as it were.
So we try and sit in the middle of an extreme view. We like the music we like and hope that sometimes more than often we will like new things that are released.
I have said before that I think the concept of what is new music has changed in the last 5 to 7 years. The digital revolution has meant that it may just be new to you. If it is new to you then when does it matter when it was released? In this post i said that I quite liked the lady gaga song. This is very much a fad. I do not necessarily mean that from my perspective that liking lady gaga is a fad. Although that is also true to an extent. What i mean is that Lady Gaga's music is not revolutionary in any sense of the word. It is not anything more than the latest thing. She is the Madonna, Britney, Pink type of character for the last couple of years. She will release a couple of albums and then more than likely fade into the background. Her next album will do extremely well, but will alienate many of her original fans. Her antics will become more and more outrageous until we are bored by the dancing bear.
It does not bother me in the slightest that i feel no connection to this. What bothers me is that by forever going backwards and finding lost classics that i will miss something truly great. You know something though. i am not so sure I have missed anything lately. has there been a truly seminal album in the last few years? Has there been something that was completely unmissable? Something we all had to have that united us all in the love of music? Was there an album that made everyone go, you know, i don't usually like this kind of music , but I love that album?
I did a quick search using the somewhat ubiquitous google for the best albums of the 2000s. Now I know i am not going to find the answers to life's mysteries using google. However, This is it, by the strokes came up a lot.
this was the main song from that album
I have to post a live version as apparently copyright has blocked it in my country. Which is odd. However, it is a good song and a good album. Is a great album. Well no, it isn't. in fact it does not compare to great albums very favourably.
That said a band that deserve a lot more accolades for making great music are Interpol. Interpol are fucking brilliant. Sorry about the language, but I feel quite strongly about this. if there was a band that i would say stood above all of the other dross on the 2000s , it would be Interpol. A band that have a song called, There's no I in threesome. Has there been a better song title? Listen to the lyrics of the song. Actually listen to them this time
Not only slightly humours title, but a somewhat haunting song in the isolation it brings to the party.
What else was there? Well there was Queens of the Stone age. I know, they are pretty good. There was The White Stripes, There was The Shins. I don't know about the shins. I like there music a lot at times. I rarely hear a song come on shuffle and think to myself, wow that is special.
Hear is song that deserves to be called truly great
You had to be into Slipknot to find that song. That is an amazing song. i mean truly brilliant.
Dangermouse . . .or in this incarnation gnarls barkley
As the man says
"yeah out there I was out of touch
but it wasn't because i didn't know enough
I just knew too much"
Maybe that's the issue.
Don't worry , I am not trying to suggest i know too much. But maybe ,, because there is so much choice that sometimes, things get hidden or forgotten. Going back to them means you perhaps give them a better listen this time around. You know, maybe I am not so old after all.
Wednesday 2 March 2011
Does that make them cool by association?
A while ago in my post on Punk I posted this video clip
Which is by Terry Jacks, as it says. I posted it because it was the highest selling song of that period where music was all a bit strange. Punk was about to break, and the hippy age was definitely dead. The main players where either dead or so lost in drugs that they weren't really doing anything that good.
i looked it up a bit subsequently, and it seems it was one of Kurt Cobain favorite songs.Now Kurt Cobain was cool. More than a little messed up, and committing suicide when you have a young kid is selfish. None-the-less he was cool. So he if he liked that song does that make the song cool? Does it make Terry Jacks cool?
Here is the Kurt Cobain version
So does that mean because someone cool covered a song it makes the original cool?
There is actually a huge amount of this. Lots of people , cool people cover songs from bands or people that are perhaps considered not so cool. Not that I can pretend to understand what is cool. I mean it is completely subjective.
But hey,that said, my place, my rules, Sonic Youth are cool. End of it. Here is the mighty Kool Thing, with Chuck -D , another cool person
So Sonic youth are massive fans of The Carpenters , I know, The Carpenters. So much so that when a Carpenters tribute album was touted, they were one of the main instigators of getting everyone involved.
Off the same album as Kool Thing they did Tunic song for Karen. Listen to some of the lyrics in this.
That is a great song about a very messed up subject. Girls eat for god's sake eat. Size zero makes you look like boys, no one wants that.
Here is there song on the tribute album, Which is a little messed up also
None the less, it brings their cool to The Carpenters. OK, now brace yourself. This is actually a good album. I realise I am talking about The Carpenters here, but it has Grant lee Buffalo, Cracker, to name but two of my favourite lost bands. It also has the mighty Shonen Knife on it. Just for fun here is their song
Who knew three secretaries from Osaka could be so cool? Check out some of their other videos. That is pop punk at it's finest.
Is anyone else creeped out a bit by the Carpenters? I have watched some of their videos writing this, that is a very strange dynamic.
Back to the point. There are so many versions of covers that seem to change the meaning of the song. For example the cover of Hurt by Johnny Cash. It is a Nine Inch Nails song about heroin addiction, but watch this and ask yourself are you thinking about a heroin junkie?
Now, that is an amazing song, made much more cool by association with Mr Cash. Most people who like that song are not really going to be into NIN. Not that NIN are not cool. Frankly they are, in a downward spiral kind of way . .boom boom.
One more that i have always found a little strange. Kate Bush and Peter Gabriel did Running up that Hill, Placebo did a cover. Now i am a big fan of Placebo. But I am not sure if they make this song and the writers cool by association, or it is just completely warped into something so different.
Is that cool? It is certainly what i would describe as strung out. A person at the edge of something a little bit worrying. The film clip is cool though.
It interestingly doesn't work the other way. You can not become cool by covering something done previously by someone who was cool. Boy bands , teen idol or Pop idol or whatever it is called please take note. Just because it was a great song done by cool people doesn't mean you can leach off some of that cool. In fact quite the bloody opposite. You ruin the original for all of us.
Sorry, I never liked those guys. I tell you what's up kids, your music was not cool enough to cover Zeppelin.
So does it make the original people cool by association? Well yes I think it does in a certain way. I am not saying that Terry Jacks is cool. No, but actually when the music is given new life by someone who is able to see something in it then it does make the original people that much cooler. because they wrote it. That is the beauty of music really isn't it.
Which is by Terry Jacks, as it says. I posted it because it was the highest selling song of that period where music was all a bit strange. Punk was about to break, and the hippy age was definitely dead. The main players where either dead or so lost in drugs that they weren't really doing anything that good.
i looked it up a bit subsequently, and it seems it was one of Kurt Cobain favorite songs.Now Kurt Cobain was cool. More than a little messed up, and committing suicide when you have a young kid is selfish. None-the-less he was cool. So he if he liked that song does that make the song cool? Does it make Terry Jacks cool?
Here is the Kurt Cobain version
So does that mean because someone cool covered a song it makes the original cool?
There is actually a huge amount of this. Lots of people , cool people cover songs from bands or people that are perhaps considered not so cool. Not that I can pretend to understand what is cool. I mean it is completely subjective.
But hey,that said, my place, my rules, Sonic Youth are cool. End of it. Here is the mighty Kool Thing, with Chuck -D , another cool person
So Sonic youth are massive fans of The Carpenters , I know, The Carpenters. So much so that when a Carpenters tribute album was touted, they were one of the main instigators of getting everyone involved.
Off the same album as Kool Thing they did Tunic song for Karen. Listen to some of the lyrics in this.
That is a great song about a very messed up subject. Girls eat for god's sake eat. Size zero makes you look like boys, no one wants that.
Here is there song on the tribute album, Which is a little messed up also
None the less, it brings their cool to The Carpenters. OK, now brace yourself. This is actually a good album. I realise I am talking about The Carpenters here, but it has Grant lee Buffalo, Cracker, to name but two of my favourite lost bands. It also has the mighty Shonen Knife on it. Just for fun here is their song
Who knew three secretaries from Osaka could be so cool? Check out some of their other videos. That is pop punk at it's finest.
Is anyone else creeped out a bit by the Carpenters? I have watched some of their videos writing this, that is a very strange dynamic.
Back to the point. There are so many versions of covers that seem to change the meaning of the song. For example the cover of Hurt by Johnny Cash. It is a Nine Inch Nails song about heroin addiction, but watch this and ask yourself are you thinking about a heroin junkie?
Now, that is an amazing song, made much more cool by association with Mr Cash. Most people who like that song are not really going to be into NIN. Not that NIN are not cool. Frankly they are, in a downward spiral kind of way . .boom boom.
One more that i have always found a little strange. Kate Bush and Peter Gabriel did Running up that Hill, Placebo did a cover. Now i am a big fan of Placebo. But I am not sure if they make this song and the writers cool by association, or it is just completely warped into something so different.
Is that cool? It is certainly what i would describe as strung out. A person at the edge of something a little bit worrying. The film clip is cool though.
It interestingly doesn't work the other way. You can not become cool by covering something done previously by someone who was cool. Boy bands , teen idol or Pop idol or whatever it is called please take note. Just because it was a great song done by cool people doesn't mean you can leach off some of that cool. In fact quite the bloody opposite. You ruin the original for all of us.
Sorry, I never liked those guys. I tell you what's up kids, your music was not cool enough to cover Zeppelin.
So does it make the original people cool by association? Well yes I think it does in a certain way. I am not saying that Terry Jacks is cool. No, but actually when the music is given new life by someone who is able to see something in it then it does make the original people that much cooler. because they wrote it. That is the beauty of music really isn't it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)