The Music Thread.

[otters~1]

There's a lot of good rap. Speaking of rap and musical influence, what about, like, Tupac or The Chronic? You don't have to like them, but you should acknowledge the influence they've had over modern rap.

You're right. I actually misspoke. Some of Public Enemy's stuff is good; also Beastie Boys and Tupac. But rap now (that is, the stuff in the last five years in which you can't understand what they're saying except for the occasional 'fuck') is not something I would be proud to have influenced, if I were them.

[a happy song]

One of the main reasons you fell in love with the music you did in the first place is because it was new and exciting, right?

Yes, but. Sure, when I first heard the Stones or Queen or whatever, I was blown away. But the newest bands that managed to give me that feeling of awe are U2 and The Police. Rap does nothing for me, hip-hop is a joke.... I find myself listening to indie and alternative stuff which has morphed into mainstream music because there's nothing else to listen to. Also local bands.

I'm kind've pissed off at the state of music right now. You can call me picky or narrow-minded, but I have broadened my musical horizons--I'm listening to music now that I would never listen to if Otis Redding or somebody was still singing. It's not good, but it's the best we've got.

It makes me sad that, instead of realizing the quality of music has degenerated hugely over the years, people just shrug and crank the Nirvana.


PS: Kings of Leon sounds sort of like U2. :)

EDIT: That came off as a really whiny post, but I can't talk about modern music without whining a little. Sorry.

You're right, it did come across as very close minded and quite whiny. Honestly, I don't think you've delved anywhere near deep enough, this is compacted by your statement that "Music has degenerate hugely over the years". Seems to me that all you're doing is raging about he lack of quality in the mainstream so hard you fail to see past it.

The problem might lie in the fact that there is now so much more music out there for you to search through. Due to digital distribution, the saturation and expansion of genres and their affiliates, the cost of producing records falling so low, and so on, you have to look a little further than the radio and charts sometimes.

There are so many mesmerisingly brilliant artists out there for you to find, not all of them will suit your tastes of course, but clinging to statements such as "the quality of music has degenerated hugely over the years" is only perpetuating your ignorance and shallow mindedness.

Oh, and Kings Of Leon sound nothing like U2. Kings of Leon are actually a very decent band ;)

[otters~1]

...and that's precisely why I'm into the local Austin, Texas music scene--diamonds in the rough, and all that. Believe me, I listen to a /lot/ of stuff. I'm sure I'm missing quite a lot, but I can't do much about that except keep looking.

[Drathmoore]

Yes, but. Sure, when I first heard the Stones or Queen or whatever, I was blown away. But the newest bands that managed to give me that feeling of awe are U2 and The Police. Rap does nothing for me, hip-hop is a joke.... I find myself listening to indie and alternative stuff which has morphed into mainstream music because there's nothing else to listen to. Also local bands.

I'm kind've pissed off at the state of music right now. You can call me picky or narrow-minded, but I have broadened my musical horizons--I'm listening to music now that I would never listen to if Otis Redding or somebody was still singing. It's not good, but it's the best we've got.

It makes me sad that, instead of realizing the quality of music has degenerated hugely over the years, people just shrug and crank the Nirvana.


PS: Kings of Leon sounds sort of like U2. :)

EDIT: That came off as a really whiny post, but I can't talk about modern music without whining a little. Sorry.

That's pretty much my point of view as well.

I acknowledge stuff like Tupac and whatever, but I just can't stand to like it. I've tried listening to it, but I really don't like it. Maybe it's the stereotypes, or the lack of complex harmony. Then again, I'm the sort of person that listens to Classic FM in their freetime (anti-youth stereotype ftw!). The reason I liked the music wasn't much that it was new, per say, but I would call it exciting, yes. And I could argue that its also to do with upbringing; my dad's favourite kinds of music are mainly Blues and Pink Floyd, and hates the rap/hip-hop stuff. And the same could be said about me.

That's just my opinion of it though. Just because I say hip-hop is crap, doesn't mean it is.

[SlappyMcGee]

Awful. Awful awful awful awful.

Hip Hop is a joke? Fuck you. You don't get something, and that's fine. But choose your words way better, because it isn't a joke, it's a really cool genre that matches lyricism and beat. And I'm sure that the many musicians who labour at it and take it seriously would be offended by your comment.

Second of all, and more importantly, music has not gotten worse. It's gotten different. The entire classic music era is built on nostalgia. Don't get me wrong; The Beatles are the greatest pop musicians of all time. But they aren't the greatest shoegaze band of all time. In fact, people hadn't even thought of sounds like shoegaze at the time, and if they had, I seriously doubt McCartney could have churned out a good shoegaze song. The idea that music has gotten progressively worse is a xenophobic falsehood. Music is almost always more loved in retrospect (Re: Weezer's Pinkerton was called the worst album of the year, and then later lauded as the best of '96, if not the definitive power pop album.) This is because when something is new and interesting, it's intimidating, weird, and offputting. Once we've gotten used to it, we look back and realize the art more fully. Look at how old people, already set in their ways, hated the music of The Beatles at first. The same shift happened with nearly every significant change in rock; from Led Zeppelin, to a more minor backlash towards the corporate rock of Boston, to the hard rock/metal wave of the Eighties, to the alternative/grunge movement of the 90's. Not one of these major paradigms in music was well received by people who had already decided the kind of music they like. It seems like people would rather be close-minded than embracing of a modern music scene.

Third, JOANNA NEWSOM ftw.

[a happy song]

Awful. Awful awful awful awful.

Hip Hop is a joke? Fuck you. You don't get something, and that's fine. But choose your words way better, because it isn't a joke, it's a really cool genre that matches lyricism and beat. And I'm sure that the many musicians who labour at it and take it seriously would be offended by your comment.

Second of all, and more importantly, music has not gotten worse. It's gotten different. The entire classic music era is built on nostalgia. Don't get me wrong; The Beatles are the greatest pop musicians of all time. But they aren't the greatest shoegaze band of all time. In fact, people hadn't even thought of sounds like shoegaze at the time, and if they had, I seriously doubt McCartney could have churned out a good shoegaze song. The idea that music has gotten progressively worse is a xenophobic falsehood. Music is almost always more loved in retrospect (Re: Weezer's Pinkerton was called the worst album of the year, and then later lauded as the best of '96, if not the definitive power pop album.) This is because when something is new and interesting, it's intimidating, weird, and offputting. Once we've gotten used to it, we look back and realize the art more fully. Look at how old people, already set in their ways, hated the music of The Beatles at first. The same shift happened with nearly every significant change in rock; from Led Zeppelin, to a more minor backlash towards the corporate rock of Boston, to the hard rock/metal wave of the Eighties, to the alternative/grunge movement of the 90's. Not one of these major paradigms in music was well received by people who had already decided the kind of music they like. It seems like people would rather be close-minded than embracing of a modern music scene.

Third, JOANNA NEWSOM ftw.

Pretty much perfect. +Rep.

Just because you think you defy some kind of teenage template, or that you consider your musical tastes superior, doesn't give you the right to denounce entire genres as worthless. I mean, you do have that right if you want to be pedantic, but it's steeped in arrogance, ignorance, and as Slappy rightly puts, could be considered quite offensive.

[T3chno]

Awful. Awful awful awful awful.

Hip Hop is a joke? Fuck you. You don't get something, and that's fine. But choose your words way better, because it isn't a joke, it's a really cool genre that matches lyricism and beat. And I'm sure that the many musicians who labour at it and take it seriously would be offended by your comment.

I totally agree here. I feel like smacking people who follow the claim that hip-hop is all about having money and being a pimp and having money.

(Re: Weezer's Pinkerton was called the worst album of the year, and then later lauded as the best of '96, if not the definitive power pop album.) .

After my first listen to that album, I fell in love with it.


I've had a couple of friends yell at me because they saw that I listened to Akon off my Last.fm. I asked them what's wrong with it and they simply replied that his music stinks, it's generic, and 'just like every other hip-hop artist'. I have to completely disagree because several of his songs are amazing and I just like listening to them.

Ugh. I really stink at making points. I'm better at actions than words. :/

[SkyPanda]

It makes me sad that, instead of realizing the quality of music has degenerated hugely over the years, people just shrug and crank the Nirvana.

Well seeing as this is kinda a debate thread, i'd like to say that I believe the internet has made the term 'modern music' obsolete. Not only are is there guaranteed to be somebody out there playing every style of music you could possibly imagine, but it's now widely available. Perhaps most people usually mean "modern popular music", though.

[otters~1]

Awful. Awful awful awful awful.

Hip Hop is a joke? Fuck you. You don't get something, and that's fine. But choose your words way better, because it isn't a joke, it's a really cool genre that matches lyricism and beat. And I'm sure that the many musicians who labour at it and take it seriously would be offended by your comment.

Hip-hop is a joke... to me. I should have made that clear. Your point that old people were originally against rock and roll is a good one; there's no way to see how hip-hop will last as a genre right now. Personally, I find a musician like... Fergie (who's more pop-ish), to pick one of a hundred, nauseating, and I don't understand anyone who says her music is original or sounds good.

Who would you say is a good, influential hip-hop artist, Slappy? I'll try them out, and see if it's possible for us to ever agree on anything.

[capt_weasle]

There are things about the way some people approach music that bug me. Anytime someone asks me about my favorite band or favorite genre, I do not have an answer. I will listen to anything that sounds good to me or just strikes that right chord. I suppose though that I do tend to lean towards the electronic genre, because there is a lot of awesome music in that field. Additionally I know a lot of people who listen to indie music for the sake of being "non-conformist." The whole idea of nonconformity irritates me because no matter what, you're going to be following another crowd. Well that's my vague three cents.

So, anyone else besides me loving the new Moby album?

[Drathmoore]

Just because you think you defy some kind of teenage template, or that you consider your musical tastes superior, doesn't give you the right to denounce entire genres as worthless. I mean, you do have that right if you want to be pedantic, but it's steeped in arrogance, ignorance, and as Slappy rightly puts, could be considered quite offensive.

The teenage thing was a side point; I wasn't using that for arguement. And I don't consider my musical tastes superior, just what I like. And I don't think it's completely worthless; saying hip-hop is a joke is, yes, a harsh and ignorant view of things, of which I retract the statement. There have been a few good songs in my opinion, but nothing that's really hooked me on the genre. And I know saying this is going to bite me in the ass, but the stereotypes...

Yeah. Not the right way of looking at the genre, but it's one of the reasons I don't like it. Pedantic and Xenophobic, yes, but that's just how I view it.

Who would you say is a good, influential hip-hop artist, Slappy? I'll try them out, and see if it's possible for us to ever agree on anything.

I'll take that up as well; maybe I haven't listened to the right people.

[SlappyMcGee]

Awful. Awful awful awful awful.

Hip Hop is a joke? Fuck you. You don't get something, and that's fine. But choose your words way better, because it isn't a joke, it's a really cool genre that matches lyricism and beat. And I'm sure that the many musicians who labour at it and take it seriously would be offended by your comment.

Hip-hop is a joke... to me. I should have made that clear. Your point that old people were originally against rock and roll is a good one; there's no way to see how hip-hop will last as a genre right now. Personally, I find a musician like... Fergie (who's more pop-ish), to pick one of a hundred, nauseating, and I don't understand anyone who says her music is original or sounds good.

Who would you say is a good, influential hip-hop artist, Slappy? I'll try them out, and see if it's possible for us to ever agree on anything.

I don't think it's my role necessarily to try and show you what bands hold significant influence over hip-hop, but NWA's Straight Outta Compton was a predecessor. See also early Run DMC and De La Soul. Modern artists of influence are more like Kanye West, who, despite ridiculous lyrics, does some extremely cool things with production and knows a good tune. And everybody ought to listen to Jay-Z's The Blueprint.

[a happy song]

Hip Hop isn't my favourite genre either, but I would suggest you check out Jurrasic Five's 'Jurassic 5 LP'. It's lighthearted, intelligent, and a lot of fun, it'll do away with the sterotypical view you hold of Hip-Hop for the duration of its play, regardless of whether you actually enjoy it or not.

Even if you don't like it, stick with it till the end and think of it as a free education that might help with your xenophobic ideals. ;)

(If you use Spotify, the entire album is on there.)

[Donfuy]

The closest thing to hip-hop or rap I listen is Gorillaz. They have some quite good songs, specially in the Demon Days album. The electro-rap-jazzy-(punk?) mix they make is unbelievably awesome, in my opinion.

They have some "pure rap" songs in their albums too, but I gotta admit they're the least enjoyable for me, like "Rock the House". Don't take that I totally dislike it, just that I love it less.


Talking about influent artists, the only band that keeps going on my head that could possibly deserve a... "title" like that is U2. Since October to No Line on the Horizon, they're quite awesome and they sure are a reference to many bands. I underline the fact that this last CD is really good, a lot better than How to Dismantle an Atomic Bomb.


Kinda unrelated to the main topic of influence, just a thing I've been thinking: in the modern days it's a lot more difficult to a musician/group to grow a lot more popular and be clearly above everyone else, to start and be a legendary pop star, isn't it? Or is it just a silly thinking of me?

[a happy song]

Kinda unrelated to the main topic of influence, just a thing I've been thinking: in the modern days it's a lot more difficult to a musician/group to grow a lot more popular and be clearly above everyone else, to start and be a legendary pop star, isn't it? Or is it just a silly thinking of me?

I believe it would be more difficult in the current climate. The industry just doesn't work the same way it used to. I think this has mainly been caused by the saturation of choice by the advent of digital distribution and low cost home production values meaning there is so much more music out their for people to delve into.

It's not because older bands were greater, it's simply because far more choice = less chance of a single band rising up and dominating.

I'd say U2 hold on to their influence due to their fame more than the quality of their actual music. They got to where they were on the strength of what they wrote, but I think now they're just so well known that people buy their records regardless of the quality. That's how mainstream music operates mostly, and I'm glad it's a creature that seems to be drawing its last gasps of air.

[pinballwizard96]

I believe it would be more difficult in the current climate. The industry just doesn't work the same way it used to. I think this has mainly been caused by the saturation of choice by the advent of digital distribution and low cost home production values meaning there is so much more music out their for people to delve into.

It's not because older bands were greater, it's simply because far more choice = less chance of a single band rising up and dominating.

Definitely, but could this lead to older bands being hailed by some as an end-all-have-to-listen-to because they were dominating in their time and there is a full history to their careers
-as opposed to-
current bands registering in people's minds as 'another good band' when in fact their music may be just as revolutionary and unique to some people as the older music is to others?

Also, could the gradual shift in the atmosphere of live shows contribute to stereotypes of older vs newer bands? In my opinion, likely so.

[smartalco]

It's gotten different. The entire classic music era is built on nostalgia.

Thats a great theory, but how exactly am I supposed to be nostalgic towards something that was created well before I was alive and that I have only been listening to for a couple years? Pre 5-6 years ago, I almost never listened to music, and when I did, it was just whatever was on the radio. When I did start listening to music a lot, it was mostly current-day mainstream rock. Then a friend got me into various forms of metal (I like just about every metal band that doesn't do growly vocals, most into epic/power metal). Finally a couple years ago I was digging around in my dad's ridiculously huge collection of music (couple dozen vinyls, a couple hundred cassettes, and 18 days worth of music in his iTunes library) and found all the classic rock that I have now come to love more than any other genre. By this time, I was listening to music most of the day every day. It is rare you will find me doing anything without something playing in the background. Given that, I ate through what he had pretty fast. Maybe that is why I want more of the same so much, I have listened to everything I can find a few dozen times over already.

I have also completely lost where I was going with this, but my main point was somehow related to the first sentence up there.

[T3chno]

Hip-hop is a joke... to me. I should have made that clear. Your point that old people were originally against rock and roll is a good one; there's no way to see how hip-hop will last as a genre right now. Personally, I find a musician like... Fergie (who's more pop-ish), to pick one of a hundred, nauseating, and I don't understand anyone who says her music is original or sounds good.

Who would you say is a good, influential hip-hop artist, Slappy? I'll try them out, and see if it's possible for us to ever agree on anything.

I don't think it's my role necessarily to try and show you what bands hold significant influence over hip-hop, but NWA's Straight Outta Compton was a predecessor. See also early Run DMC and De La Soul. Modern artists of influence are more like Kanye West, who, despite ridiculous lyrics, does some extremely cool things with production and knows a good tune. And everybody ought to listen to Jay-Z's The Blueprint.

Check out Common's Basement Evolution. It's what got me into the genre. I believe Kanye West produced it too. West's work is good too, but I prefer the earlier stuff. Graduation of his was great however.

[PALEMOON]

Blazing Arrow by Blackalicious is really cool, and it was one of the first hip-hop albums i listened to. I'd recommend it if you're interested, flag.

[otters~1]

I'd say U2 hold on to their influence due to their fame more than the quality of their actual music. They got to where they were on the strength of what they wrote, but I think now they're just so well known that people buy their records regardless of the quality. That's how mainstream music operates mostly, and I'm glad it's a creature that seems to be drawing its last gasps of air.

So you agree that U2 did something, back in the '80s, to deserve their fame?

And Slappy, I suppose I forgot about Run-DMC. I like their sound. atob, I'll check out Jurassic 5. PALEMOON, I'll also try your recommendation. Thanks, all.

Finally, Donfuy, I agree that nowadays it's much harder for one group to soar above the crowd. I would say that U2, Nirvana and... Eminem, maybe? are the only ones who have really done that lately. Feel free to harangue me if I forgot somebody.

[a happy song]

So you agree that U2 did something, back in the '80s, to deserve their fame?

Well, I can't say I've ever really enjoyed their music, but they must have done something right. 'Sunday Bloody Sunday' era is quite good, imo, but everything I've heard from them in the last five years or so I'd class as MOR by-the-numbers factory produce.

You grab enough fame for whatever reason, and you'll mostly get away with whatever the hell you want.

[otters~1]

So you agree that U2 did something, back in the '80s, to deserve their fame?

Well, I can't say I've ever really enjoyed their music, but they must have done something right. 'Sunday Bloody Sunday' era is quite good, imo, but everything I've heard from them in the last five years or so I'd class as MOR by-the-numbers factory produce.

I actually agree with that completely--I don't think they've done much since 'Beautiful Day'--but I would classify the 'Sunday Bloody Sunday', 'New Year's Day' era as brilliant, not "quite good". The Joshua Tree is one of the great rock/pop albums ever made.

I'm really into U2.

[SlappyMcGee]

It's gotten different. The entire classic music era is built on nostalgia.

Thats a great theory, but how exactly am I supposed to be nostalgic towards something that was created well before I was alive and that I have only been listening to for a couple years? Pre 5-6 years ago, I almost never listened to music, and when I did, it was just whatever was on the radio. When I did start listening to music a lot, it was mostly current-day mainstream rock. Then a friend got me into various forms of metal (I like just about every metal band that doesn't do growly vocals, most into epic/power metal). Finally a couple years ago I was digging around in my dad's ridiculously huge collection of music (couple dozen vinyls, a couple hundred cassettes, and 18 days worth of music in his iTunes library) and found all the classic rock that I have now come to love more than any other genre. By this time, I was listening to music most of the day every day. It is rare you will find me doing anything without something playing in the background. Given that, I ate through what he had pretty fast. Maybe that is why I want more of the same so much, I have listened to everything I can find a few dozen times over already.

I have also completely lost where I was going with this, but my main point was somehow related to the first sentence up there.

Because each musical generation is a development of the previous? You can't actively listen to and accept Radiohead without hearing Jazz and rock bands that preceded them. Therefore, after hearing a bunch of Radiohead, and absolutely no Jazz, if you were to listen to Jazz, your brain would still be able to make connections, and it would still seem familiar. What I'm trying to point out here, is that, had the punk movement never happened BUT every other genre of music went completely unaffected (an impossibility), and someone were to release Never Mind The Bollocks today, we'd shrug and say they're derivative of Pavement. Music that was revolutionary then wouldn't be revolutionary now, and that's because music grew by simply having it.

[otters~1]

atob, I've listened to a few Jurassic 5 songs, and I must say, I'm hearing basically what I expected to. The beats are awesome, but if I want awesome beats I can get some Ratatat going. The lyrics may be creative, I don't know, but they're so low-pitched that I can't understand much (for the most part). Maybe I'm missing something in my approach to this type of music, or maybe I just flat out don't like it.

EDIT: After catching some more, this music is definitely listenable, as it were, but I'm sidetracked on Ratatat. I retract my earlier statement about it being a joke; only some of it is a joke.

[SlappyMcGee]

atob, I've listened to a few Jurassic 5 songs, and I must say, I'm hearing basically what I expected to. The beats are awesome, but if I want awesome beats I can get some Ratatat going. The lyrics may be creative, I don't know, but they're so low-pitched that I can't understand much (for the most part). Maybe I'm missing something in my approach to this type of music, or maybe I just flat out don't like it.

EDIT: After catching some more, this music is definitely listenable, as it were, but I'm sidetracked on Ratatat. I retract my earlier statement about it being a joke; only some of it is a joke.

ratatat is hip-hop. At least, not predominantly, but part-ways, for sure.