Does the fall of music ever depress you? It does me.
May 2, 2010 at 11:48 PM Post #61 of 198
Quote:

Originally Posted by jiamenguk /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Another thing about music like today, is that people like Leona Lewis, who is a very good singer (I hope most people would agree), have albums where their songs are just soooo crap! I just wish that she'd have an album solely for all the songs she's actually good at. But neeeeoooooooouuuu, they have to give her terrible, terrible songs to sing, producing a crappy, compressed, commercial album. Her entire second albums sounds like the same song repeated for 10+ times (I swear to the almighty-omnipotent-god-who'll-guide-us-with-providence that the sounds of the drum are the same in every song, and every other song Ryan Tedder has produced).

It's just sad to see someone with talent being so overwhelmed and controlled by the corporate system. I know the singers have to make a living and complying to the orders of the overminds, but please! can the overminds give people like us a divine gift and bless us with good music?
frown.gif



I agree that Ms. Lewis is a significant talent, and that her talents are wasted on the awful material and production to which she is subjected. Chalk up another one for the Simon Cowell crap machine, which turns this stuff out like sausage.

There are so many other talented artists who have been reduced to mere cogs in the promotion machines for their own careers. Jennifer Hudson has a magnificent voice, but I don't expect great things from her any time soon. When Kelly Clarkson attempted to escape from her handlers, and make her own album, they nearly destroyed her career. She is right back where she started. Clive Davis doesn't brook any BS from his employees. They stay in line, or else.

And consider the case of Eva Cassidy. A stunningly gifted singer, she was looked at and passed on by just about every major label, and never had a recording contract in the course of her short life. Why is this? Because she was a pretty female vocalist who insisted on choosing her own material and musicians, and also insisted on writing her own arrangements. We can't have that, now can we?

And yet, since her death, several million of her albums have been sold with zero promotion from the industry machine. Her readings of "Fields of Gold" and "Over the Rainbow" have come to be regarded as definitive. The waste of her talent is so very sad.

Ultimately, I think the prototype for this rigid system of manufactured fluff is Whitney Houson. I think it's safe to say that she has one of the greatest voices of the last several decades, and an occasional single here and there has lived up to her potential. But her albums are mostly safe, mediocre, and far, far below what she is capable of. The idea is to produce easily marketed, inoffensive product and then jam it down the public's throat. Again, what a waste.

Most disheartening to me is the huge popularity of American Idol, Britain's Got Talent, and all of the rest of these talent competitions that churn out homogenized mediocrity. The public gets what it deserves, unfortunately.

The good news is that the current boatload of garbage on the airwaves is essentially the death rattle of an industry that has been poisoned by its own fatuity. The corporate recording industry cannot disappear fast enough to suit me.
 
May 3, 2010 at 12:09 AM Post #62 of 198
Quote:

Originally Posted by DrBenway /img/forum/go_quote.gif

Most disheartening to me is the huge popularity of American Idol, Britain's Got Talent, and all of the rest of these talent competitions that churn out homogenized mediocrity. The public gets what it deserves, unfortunately.

.



Amen........it's as if the public forgot what talent even is.......

Bob Dylan, Tom Waits, Neil Young, Leonard Cohen, Willie Nelson.....these guys have what you call "a recognizable voice"....but it's not about that.......it's about what they were writing, the content connected with the melody. Talent is writing first and foremost. After that comes vocals and arrangement and guitar chops.....all that is supreme talent, but without a good song to back it up, without meaning, it's merely skill.

Great singers like Sam Cooke, Ray Charles, Otis Redding, Marvin Gaye, Stevie Wonder, Aretha Franklin, Michael Jackson, Prince.......they covered songs yes, but they were also capable of writing fantastic songs, songs that came from the heart and had something to say, and even if they didn't have something drastic to say, they were still sincere, innovative and passionate.
 
May 3, 2010 at 12:19 AM Post #63 of 198
Quote:

Originally Posted by nigeljames /img/forum/go_quote.gif
It would depress me if I was forced to listen to most mainstream, talentless, mind numbing, emotionless drival that is called music today.
Fortunately I don't have to
icon10.gif



So true, there's so much great stuff out there I haven't heard yet from all decades.
 
May 3, 2010 at 12:28 AM Post #64 of 198
Quote:

Originally Posted by technocrat /img/forum/go_quote.gif
All music is bad now. I only use my hi-fi to listen to bears mate.


How's the "sound stage"???
atsmile.gif
 
May 3, 2010 at 12:29 AM Post #65 of 198
Quote:

Originally Posted by DrBenway /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Most disheartening to me is the huge popularity of American Idol, Britain's Got Talent, and all of the rest of these talent competitions that churn out homogenized mediocrity. The public gets what it deserves, unfortunately.


that girl was in American Idol, and she really rocks to my ears: YouTube - Allison Iraheta - Papa Was a Rolling Stone
well, she made an album...which is the usual crap kids wanna listen to, but she's got a great voice when fed good songs
regular_smile .gif

Quote:

Originally Posted by DavidMahler /img/forum/go_quote.gif
intesting to hear the song bare-boned......it's not very good is it


I didn't realize there was a song...more like an hysteric woman w/ a wig screaming randomly, and hitting some sort of electronic device that happens to make noise.
 
May 3, 2010 at 12:30 AM Post #66 of 198
It's all about the money! in the past it was all about music and creation of new things. if you notice not only music...also the movies made today are garbage imo,in the past you had very originals movies and today they are all filled with effects instead of great plot and ideas. ofcourse there are exeptions but nowdays it is VERY VERY rare to find good music or good movie.
 
May 3, 2010 at 12:37 AM Post #67 of 198
Quote:

Originally Posted by plonter /img/forum/go_quote.gif
It's all about the money! in the past it was all about music and creation of new things.


Let's conveniently forget tin pan alley, Brill Building etc......

Pop music has always had rubbish and good stuff, and will be ever thus. I think disatisfaction with this is as much part of ageing as the quality of the music. Also, with even "rock" having been around for over 50 years, considerable repetitiion was always in the offing....

I stepped away for the mainstream a while back, but sometimes invetion peeps through everywhere.....
 
May 3, 2010 at 12:47 AM Post #68 of 198
I didn't liked even one song that came out in the last 8-9 years or so..
but I did like the song "fireflies",it's got an "oasis" kind of melody to it. so I guess it is good to have a peep once in a while and not shut out completely, but it's not like we have a choice it is everywhere
normal_smile .gif


it is true that garbage was always existed but if you compare the "garbage" of the 80 90 to 2000+ garbage there is a huge gap in quality imo. today's music is much much worse and unlistenable...at least for me. it is only getting worse and worse.
 
May 3, 2010 at 1:03 AM Post #70 of 198
Quote:

Originally Posted by DavidMahler /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Amen........it's as if the public forgot what talent even is.......

Bob Dylan, Tom Waits, Neil Young, Leonard Cohen, Willie Nelson.....these guys have what you call "a recognizable voice"....but it's not about that.......it's about what they were writing, the content connected with the melody. Talent is writing first and foremost. After that comes vocals and arrangement and guitar chops.....all that is supreme talent, but without a good song to back it up, without meaning, it's merely skill.

Great singers like Sam Cooke, Ray Charles, Otis Redding, Marvin Gaye, Stevie Wonder, Aretha Franklin, Michael Jackson, Prince.......they covered songs yes, but they were also capable of writing fantastic songs, songs that came from the heart and had something to say, and even if they didn't have something drastic to say, they were still sincere, innovative and passionate.



I agree that songwriting is central to great music. But I think there are certainly some artists who can achieve greatness by exclusively performing material written by others. Linda Ronstadt was often (unfairly, to my mind) criticized for not writing her own material. But her readings of songs by writers like Warren Zevon were at times relvelatory. Elvis never, to my knowledge, wrote a song, but I consider him to be one of the major early rockers.

This is why Whitney Houston's career breaks my heart. Most of her material has been commercial product that doesn't come close to challenging her artistically. When she is given a great song to sing (Dolly Parton's "I Will Always Love You" comes immediately to mind) the results are breathtaking.
 
May 3, 2010 at 1:48 AM Post #71 of 198
I don't listen to much new stuff. The newest music in my player is "Plastic Beach" by Gorillaz. I think I actually have an album released in 2009, but I'm not sure. lol

I'm spending a lot of time finding stuff that reminds me of certain times of my life - college music, music that reminds me of my time in the service, music from the days when I first moved to Portland, OR, etc. I also try to find cds that are mastered nicely so I can enjoy them at safe listening levels and still pick out all the details.
 
May 3, 2010 at 2:49 AM Post #72 of 198
Quote:

Originally Posted by DrBenway /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Elvis never, to my knowledge, wrote a song, but I consider him to be one of the major early rockers.
.



Elvis is such an interesting case. He wasn't much of an artist, but more a performer, maybe the best rock performer who ever lived. However, his legacy is so much of his celebrity, I don't think music has lived on at all. I don't think today's youth has much affiliation with Elvis's contribution as an artist. Elvis was immediately influential on the youth of his time, so much so, that to people who grew up in that time frame, Elvis is almost synonymous with Rock music, just as Mozart = Classical music to so many. But Elvis's material was never outstanding, they were average songs at best which he brought charisma, swagger and a decent voice. He showed the world how to rock, how to capture an audience rock style.....and for that his contribution was immense, but his music has not sustained (in my opinion) as Ellington's, Armstrong's, The Beatles, Pink Floyd and other mainstream acts. His name may be the biggest of all, but his legacy is almost that of Mickey Mouse's, all fluff with very little substance.
 
May 3, 2010 at 3:50 AM Post #74 of 198
Quote:

Originally Posted by DavidMahler /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I heard some Usher song on the radio a few hours ago and contained within it were the lyrics "Shawdee got a booty like pow pow pow, shawdee's got some boobies like wow oh wow".....I thought it was a joke until I came home, youtubed it and saw that people genuinely think this great music and take it quite seriously.


" Mah humps mah humps mah humps. My lovely lady lumps"
As long as there is sex, some demographics will lap it up.
 
May 3, 2010 at 4:07 AM Post #75 of 198
Quote:

Originally Posted by DavidMahler /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Elvis is such an interesting case. He wasn't much of an artist, but more a performer, maybe the best rock performer who ever lived. However, his legacy is so much of his celebrity, I don't think music has lived on at all. I don't think today's youth has much affiliation with Elvis's contribution as an artist. Elvis was immediately influential on the youth of his time, so much so, that to people who grew up in that time frame, Elvis is almost synonymous with Rock music, just as Mozart = Classical music to so many. But Elvis's material was never outstanding, they were average songs at best which he brought charisma, swagger and a decent voice. He showed the world how to rock, how to capture an audience rock style.....and for that his contribution was immense, but his music has not sustained (in my opinion) as Ellington's, Armstrong's, The Beatles, Pink Floyd and other mainstream acts. His name may be the biggest of all, but his legacy is almost that of Mickey Mouse's, all fluff with very little substance.


We'll have to respectfully disagree on that one. The hype that surrounded his career took on a life of its own, to be sure. The "king of rock n roll" title is silly and undeserved. You could just as easily apply that to Little Richard, Buddy Holly, Chuck Berry, or a host of others.

The point is, none of that was his fault.

When you say that his material was never outstanding, I have to disagree. "Jailhouse Rock" is an amazing track, with production and lead guitar by Chet Atkins, surely one of the greatest musicians of the 20th Century. The Sun sessions were revelatory. This was rockabilly, not blues or R&B or country. Deeply informed by all of the above, but something completely different on several levels. Listen with fresh ears to "Mystery Train," or "Good Rockin' Tonight," or "Baby Let's Play House." These are all musical masterpieces to me. And despite his drug addled later life, he occasionally got it together, right up to the end. "Suspicious Minds" is a brilliant record, and that was from the 70s, long after his prime. And when I was in the 5th grade or so, he released "Burnin' Love," which demonstrated that he still had it, in ways that his younger competition simply did not.

Elvis is a flash-point, for a variety of reasons. African-Americans quite understandably tend to think of him as a cultural thief. I understand and respect that argument. But I think the best refutation of that argument is in the grooves of his records. Listen to those records again, with an open mind, and you might be surprised by what you hear.

I don't mean to suggest that you are not an open-minded person. But Elvis's legacy is so freighted with issues of race, class, and, as you correctly point out, celebrity BS, that it's sometimes hard to judge his work fairly. I nevertheless think the recordings speak for themselves. This ain't Justin Timberlake (rhymes with fake) that we are talking about.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top