FYI: Truth Attack - All Genres Of Music That Have Ever Existed Contain Awesome Music In Them, And If You Write Off A Whole Genre Of Music You Are Being Closeminded And Dumb

that was BARBERSHOP motherfucker

you can say this about every type of musician, not just the singer, in addition to almost every single type of entertainment job in the entire world.

Oh my bad, I didn't realize that focusing on a particular topic in the interest of having a discussion about it was intellectually dishonest.

Diana Ross recorded some good songs but the fact remains that she wouldn't have gotten to where she is today had she not fucked Barry Gordy.

i don't even know what we're arguing about anymore ... dan is saying he doesn't like punk music specifically because it contributed to a general trend fed by every aspect of popular culture in the past 50 years?

guys guys let's just agree that geir is wrong about everything

we've gone from "punk ruined music" to "wah wah wah, popular culture is junk and nobody appreciates real music" in like 50 posts

McCartney did not innovate, he just popularised further. Les Paul, Bo Diddley and other American figureheads are innovators in rock music. I don't believe anyone outside the USA can make similar claims.

i like how diana ross sings. why is she a bad singer?

Diana Ross recorded some good songs but the fact remains that she wouldn't have gotten to where she is today had she not fucked Barry Gordy.

This is not unique to the last 50 years!!

is that really true, though? to me it seems that for the musicians who do care about chops, the standard is way higher than it was 50 years ago a lot of ways (which is natural, you gotta build on what came before etc.).

xxxxp

for the musicians who do care about chops

It feels to me like this is a way smaller segment of the overall population of musicians than it used to be.

What I learned from this thread:

Did you ever play that game where someone says; Alex likes A, but doesn't like B? He likes Y, but doesn't like X? And then you had to figure out what he'd feel in other circumstances? So, Geir is a lot like that. Let's play, I'll start.

Geir likes the Beatles, but he doesn't like the Sex Pistols.
Geir likes The Great Gatsby, but he doesn't like The Sound and the Fury (see what I'm doing there? the easy to follow, obvious narrative is compelling. the more dense experimental one he doesn't like).
Geir likes John Singer Sargent, but he doesn't like Claude Monet.
Geir likes Robert Frost, but he doesn't like T.S. Elliot.
Geir likes the Exodus narrative, but he doesn't like the Isaiah narrative.

the trend dan talks about has been around for a lot longer than 50 years, you should read about rudy vallee's heyday (he even admitted later in life that he was kinda bad when he was topping the charts)

He had a rather thin, wavering tenor voice and seemed more at home singing sweet ballads than attempting vocals on jazz numbers. However, his singing, together with his suave manner and handsome boyish looks, attracted great attention, especially from young women

Does 'most tolerant music lover' = 'biggest dilettante' and if so who is the best example of this on ILM?

― Annoying Display Name (blueski), Monday, October 20, 2008 3:15 PM (23 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

i bet i could make a run for this title, its hard for me to think of music that i genuinely straight-up hate, and plus i dont really know a lot about any of the music i listen to

I don't think I'm the most tolerant music lover, but I'm probably one of the biggest dilettantes musically.

it's too bad that all discussion of genre we have here turns into people arguing with geir as he sits in his basement and frets about other living people having a good time, which is somehow unfair to him.

because the process of starting to like individual moments out of a big range of music you'd previously written off or actively disliked is really interesting.

xp i think i like sargent more than monet

tho that's kind of a solange over beyonce tynan-style challops to throw around innit

Is there a musical equivalent of prop comedy?

slipknot

Adam Sandler? XP

Goole OTM--I remember individual moments that got me thinking seriously about black metal and hip-hop and shit. And Sargent wrecks Monet.

Track that got you into various genres might actually be a good list thread

yeah i'd been seriously anti-reggae in an ignorant way, like yah puff puff bob marley gtfo with that etc. i don't know exactly when i heard "here i come" but was like holy FUCK

xp

I'd be interested in a Most Musically Diverse Listener thread or something like that. What's the wildest stuff people listen to on ILX?

i like how diana ross sings. why is she a bad singer?

She's not a bad singer; she's a singer I don't like that much. I think her voice is pretty weak, particularly compared to the other Supremes, but she benefited greatly from getting access to great songwriters, musicians and producers. I like a bunch of her songs but learning more about her story and hearing some of the women she sang with made me less impressed with her.

most tolerant music lover = cliche but willing to put money on seward (s)

uh erm but i don't think he's a dilettante

There has been an ongoing devaluation of the role of the singer as a musician in most forms of popular music for the past 50 years; punk is one part of a larger picture. It's not just about "singing pretty" and it's not the only reason; it's about the escalation of image and marketing as primary components of the musical landscape.

I can see what you're getting at with this. talk to the average punk band about getting "voice lessons" and you may get met with mockery and/or astonishment - though their guitarist, bassist, and drummer probably had lessons somewhere along the line.

however, I knew a punk/metal band that was becoming extremely popular in the underground, and the lead singer was pressured to leave because the guitarist was regarded as the stronger singer. they didn't think they could make the leap to a major with him (which they did, without the lead singer - whether they could've done the same with him is anybody's guess).

and I know a noise rock band that had their album recently rejected by a noise rock label because they needed to "work on the vocals" per the label head - even though their singer brings a *lot* to the table in terms of "image" or "energy" and putting her picture on the album cover would probably move units all by itself.

there are plenty of punk/indie bands and industry types that are concerned about the quality of their vocals. image over content? sure, that shit's all over, but hanging it around punk's neck, in whole or in part, seems like blaming the mud for bringing the rain...

^^^^ how does this disqualify it from being melodic? "melodic" = having emphasis on melody, and rhythm is one of the dimensions of melody.

something i've posted before on (shockingly) another geir-centric thread:

According to Sophie, Constanze's sister, the cold poultices that the physician Dr. Closset had placed upon Mozart's burning head had rendered Mozart unconscious right up until the moment of death, and Mozart's last movement was an attempt to express vocally the drum passages in the Requiem he was writing.

mozart died writing drum parts!

for the musicians who do care about chops

It feels to me like this is a way smaller segment of the overall population of musicians than it used to be.

― Shakey Mo Collier, Monday, October 20, 2008 2:41 PM (10 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

i guess this is true if you're talking straight instrumental chops (ie not counting computer/dj/mic skills etc.), although i still wonder. that is one of the things i like about new orleans, is that it has a culture where playing horns and drums commands a lot of respect, so kids end up having these amazing chops by the time they get out of high school.

McCartney did not innovate, he just popularised further. Les Paul, Bo Diddley and other American figureheads are innovators in rock music.

But McCartney was the one who made rock worth listening to. 50s rock is mostly musically worthless because it is just three chords and no climax. Frank Sinatra was way superior to rock music in the 50s.

But McCartney was the one who made rock worth listening to. 50s rock is mostly musically worthless because it is just three chords and no climax. Frank Sinatra was way superior to rock music in the 50s.

I'm starting to understand why I always got the impression that people here were rolling their eyes when addressing you...

Musically punk didn't do anything that rock and roll didn't aspire to do, it just took it to new heights. I don't know who to blame for Fall Out Boy singer sounding like a tool.

I should say "greater extents" rather than "new heights"

I like Patrick Stump's voice.

Punk was often about three chords, but the good thing was, at least it was often three different chords than just I-IV-V

it's what you do with/how you manipulate the I-IV-V structure that matters - ignore the "triteness" of the I-IV-V and what do you hear?

Mozart could do fabulous things a I, a IV, and a V chord. So can Stephin Merritt. They do them in different ways. (W.A.M. is untouchable tho obv)

what's wrong with being 'closeminded' wrt music? assuming you don't make your living in the music business, why should it be seen as a negative trait?

btw the word 'chops' is p funny when u think abt it

Was anyone making a value argument about being open/close minded around music?

see threadtitle, homo

(i didnt read the thread obv)

http://images.buycostumes.com/mgen/merchandiser/17194.jpg

lolz Jordan New Orleans is a pretty unique musical environment!

Lindsay asks: "What about third wave ska?"

what's wrong with being 'closeminded' wrt music?

what's wrong with never leaving the country you live in if you have the means to do so?

nothing, as long as you don't go around calling the other countries a load of shit

OTM

what about nazi skinhead music?

regarding the premise of the thread