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

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

they could be aesthetically good but morally reprehensible.

I'm sure there is some good nazi skinhead music - racist assholes can't be good musicians?

*sigh* racist assholes tend to let boring polemics overshadow any interesting aesthetics

^^^could be said of any artist who considers politics more important than their art

like wagner?

I don't think that applies to Wagner

how about that burzum dude?

wagner considered his art the most important thing in the universe, surely.

racist assholes tend to let boring polemics overshadow any interesting aesthetics

"like wagner?" was actually in response to this comment

Please show me the awesomeness contained in new age and acid jazz. Thank you in advance.

new age: lotsa Eno, early Deuter, Manuel Gottsching, Steve Roach, Gabrielle Roth, Robert Rich, O Yuki Conjugate, Liz Story, Harold Budd, Philip Perkins, Jon Hassell (especially Aka Darbari Java), maybe some Andrew Deutsch or Jliat if you wanna cross over into drone.

somebody else is gonna have to do acid jazz.

But you say: surely if this were true, it would be common knowledge. Not sure. There are many thing that are true – the state is a parasite on society, private property would solve most social problems, rock music is tedious and stupid – but are nonetheless not generally known or applied.

xpost

All that counts as new age?

have you ever heard any of it? yes it fucking counts.

you can't just define genres to exclude what you actually like, see upthread.

Well then I guess I loooooooooooove new age now. Thanx for the schooling.

I hope 1970s Miles counts as acid jazz.

C'mon Kevin, some of Eno's stuff could TOTALLY be considered new age by someone who isn't terribly concerned by labels - or at the very least, a lot closer to new age than to other enomusic.

...but of course, this is all about the ultimate uselessness of labels.

can this thread explain why there is no JADE WARRIOR thread?

Ha, I remember one time when I was home from college I was playing a Rachel's album and my parents said it sounded like something on Windham Hill.

some of Eno's stuff could TOTALLY be considered new age by someone who isn't terribly concerned by labels - or at the very least, a lot closer to new age than to other enomusic.

I hear ya, MVB. But I think the key idea in your xpost is less "some Eno = new age" than it is "someone who isn't terribly concerned by labels." Because for me, the interesting aspect of genre is feeling out the contexts in which a genre label signifies and then assessing the value of that labeling gesture. And by "value," I don't mean right or wrong but rather frequency. Have enough people understood and referred to Eno as new age in order to make the term valuable (in relation to Eno)? Who calls Eno new age and when? Should someone who isn't terribly concerned by labels determine a genre label? Should Eno be considered new age because On Land is a lot closer to new age than Here Come the Warm Jets is?

And in the fwiw category:

No results found for "eno is so new age"

Results 1 - 1 of 1 for "eno is new age"

But the latter leads to a piece ripping on that notion. Some nuggets:

"new age" music-- an aesthetic scourge (Eno) unintentionally helped to bring into being.

NEWS FLASH:
!!!!BRIAN ENO IS NOT A NEW AGE MUSICIAN!!!!

WHY?
Good question.
Well, because New Age music is political and spiritual. Eno is neither. Eno is neutral.

There's this idea that if something is mellow, and electronic it is somehow "New Age Music."

OTHER ARTISTS
WHO ARE NOT NEW AGE MUSICIANS
AND YET WILL BE FREQUENTLY FOUND
IN THE NEW AGE SECTION:
John Fahey
Tangerine Dream
Ryuichi Sakamoto
Jean Michel Jarre
Robert Fripp
Pete Namlook
David Van Teighem
Penguin Café Orchestra
Philip Glass
John Hassell

No results found for "eno is new age as fuck"