Ness K Vs. Cover Bands

hey, sorry for late reply but i was trying to word it in a non personal/purely academic fashion.

i was merely citing the legal definition of a song according to copywrite laws. Melody, harmony and lyric.

this was far from the point of my post, being that herbie hancock, jazz physician and all around demigod, was instrumental in the development of early rap music, a progression from jazz, then to funk, and now rap.

I was interested in some of the points raised though.

I think that all songs, regardless of how they are built/composed and or played, have some kind of harmonic structure. Harmony literally refers to any two frequencies sounding simultaneously and to the resulting interaction.

Obviously there is a lot of different ideas and cultures surrounding certain ways to use harmony, the western ideas of harmony being the most commonly known amongst those of us in th western world(surprisingly enough.)

But classical harmony from a european point of view is far from the be all and end all of harmonic interaction. In fact, if a composition consisted entirely of a snare drum being repeatedly hit, it would still have a harmonic structure, albeit a very sparse one.

To be brutally precise, any one note sounded from any instrument (with the exception of a perfect sine wave) has its own harmonic structure. The different harmonic undertones and the levels at which these sound over the root frequency are what results in timbre, the thing that makes a guitar sound like a guitar and the clarinet sound like a chest infection.

It is these principles, in fact, that not only resulted in the development of early synthesisers(by studying the wave forms of certain instruments and trying to replicate the shape by increasing and decreasing the velocity of the upper harmonics) but was eventually used to develop MIDI sound patches and the terrible sounds of the eighties(i actually love the eighties)

But I digress.

The point is that even things like Japanese Taiko drumming and Indian Tabla recitals, though entirely percussive, still contain harmony and melody. Drum sounds are still made up of multiple vibrations of different frequencies that our brain percieves as being drums. Whether in "tune" (A440 being the accepted western standard) or frolicking through the magical kingdom of microtones, Harmony doesn't mean major minor diminished, it merely means that more than one frequency is sounding simultaneously. The way we utilise, organise and reproduce those frequencies is called music.

Like i said no nastiness intended, i just love the thrill of a good debate. Feel free to rebut, I know i would. You learn more about the world when your ideas are challenged.

I listened to those three rap videos that were posted, I remember Bust a Move and enjoyed that one, but not because of the rap. I really like the funky sound of the guitar and bass. But the rap itself meant nothing to me, I would prefer singing over that music. The other two videos were horrible in my opinion.

But I realize this is just my opinion. I completely respect that other people have different tastes from me, and I am glad everybody is different. And as I said, I have heard rap songs I enjoy. I once saw a live band that combined very heavy Rock with Rap and it was awesome. But I gotta hear some real music, not some sample played over and over a thousand times with a drum machine. Sorry, but that is not my idea of music.

And I do not think the Beatles are still played on the radio everyday because us geezers control the airwaves. As someone pointed out, there was lots of junk songs back then as well, and you do not hear them now. Radio stations are very in tune with music that people enjoy. People do not listen to the Beatles because they were brainwashed, they listen to it because it is good music. If the radio station plays bad music, folks will turn the knob. :wink:

And lots of young people love Classic Rock. I have talked to many and they say they prefer it to much modern music. Nobody brainwashed these kids, they genuinely think the music was better. One of my co-worker's son who is 16 has just started a band, and most of their music is covers of Classic Rock tunes with a modern slant put on it. Nobody is telling these guys what to play or brainwashing them. This is the music they like.

This is not a bunch of geezers bragging that their music was better. The music really was better. Good music stands the test of time.

It is like arguing that a frozen pizza is just as good as a Filet Mignon steak. You can claim it is just as good, but everybody knows better.

Say what you will, most rap songs get about 3 weeks play tops, then fade to obscurity. They have no lasting value and most you will never hear again.

This is not a bunch of geezers bragging that their music was better. The music really was better. Good music stands the test of time.

I'm nearly your age Wes, and if you believe this, you gotta do more listening -- to the point where you get rewired enough to appreciate the new and different. There is plenty of recently created, fantastic music out there that stands up against classic rock ... and it will become just as classic in it's own right. Most of us become so strongly imprinted with the music of our youth, it becomes the "best" for us.

(Next thing you're going to tell us is that Terry Jacks was the greatest!)

(Next thing you're going to tell us is that Terry Jacks was the greatest!)

"We had joy, we had fun, we had seasons in the sun.........." :D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pfm-17pu6SQ

Greg

I like lots of modern music. I know it is getting a little dated now, but I was a big fan of the Smashing Pumpkins, Alice In Chains, Nirvana and others. I like Korn. :D

I listen to modern music all the time. And some of it I like. And the good music will last. You still hear these groups today, though it's nearly 20 years. But you will not hear 99% of the rap songs 20 years from now on the radio.

You don't hear them now.

Like I said, you can claim that frozen pizza is as good as steak, but it doesn't make it so.

OK, here is the first 100 songs on Rolling Stones list of the Greatest 500 Songs of all time.

1. Like a Rolling Stone, Bob Dylan

Now, anybody can make a poll and make it come out anyway they want. But that doesn't mean that polls aren't meaningful. I have no idea how they came up with this list. Maybe albums sold, maybe they questioned people, who knows? But how many rappers do you see on this list? How many old geezer Classic Rock artists do you see?

I saw a list last year of the top 20 touring bands by earnings. Probably 15 of the bands were old Classic Rock bands. Somebody will argue, "well, the old geezers have lots of money and so they can attend these concerts". Well, when I was a teenager that was not the case. The old geezers in my time were not out-selling the modern artists of the time. Not even close.

There's a river in Egypt called "de Nile" .

This is not a bunch of geezers bragging that their music was better. The music really was better. Good music stands the test of time.

It is like arguing that a frozen pizza is just as good as a Filet Mignon steak. You can claim it is just as good, but everybody knows better.

Like I said, you can claim that frozen pizza is as good as steak, but it doesn't make it so.

I'm not sure I understand you. You say you aren't bragging then you brag the music was better. Also, just because you like steak better doesn't mean steak IS better. Furthermore, why chose? Put steak on the pizza. Both literally and as an analogy for music.

I think that is part of the brainwashing that goes on with young guitarists. It's a lot of: this is what you SHOULD like, this is what you SHOULD play, you should like steak instead of pizza. A lot of people will admit they like different styles to get a style that is unique to them. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for that. However, I can't help but notice it's always the blues players telling metal guitarists to embrace their point of view. I've heard people say "metal is just noise" which their are entitled to think but where's the speech about this person is closed minded. Something like: "You shouldn't just stick to the blues, you should listen to all styles and incorporate some of the techniques into your own style. Here's some Pantera, it's actually quite beautiful." Meanwhile, I get sent a track, hate it and get told I'm closed minded? I know I can take any road I want on the path learning music but it seems the ones I want to go down have potholes, construction zones and detours to the blues/classic rock road.

I could find many posts that have this attitude but just one example is a post thanking Hendrix that we aren't all playing surf guitar. I love surf music, I like playing surf guitar and by studying I've gotten better pick control to tremolo pick, which I can use for other styles. Sure everyone is going to like blues over surf or vice versa but why the attitude that blues is better? Why should I thank Hendrix we aren't still playing surf when I like it?

I know I can be closed minded at times as well but I've been trying to embrace a larger few but my supervisor always says "negativity breeds negativity." Either one of two things happen, 1) you brainwash people into liking your music, most likely carrying the same attitude that it is real music and nothing else is or 2) they listen to what they want but with the same narrow minded view which means they are unlikely to explore.

I am more willing to listen to an open minded person. Someone who has taken the time to study all aspects and learn the big picture. I've had people like that in my life. My art teacher was one of them. He was a god awful person to get along with, but amazing teacher because of the reasons mentioned above. Basically, he was a jerk, but I respected him. We have many beginners come looking advice of all ages and you need that respect before people will listen to your advice. If you say "Clapton's technique in this song is similar to what you are trying to learn" someone who may not like Clapton may give it a chance, even if it's only to learn a new technique. If it's presented as "this is REAL music" they are more than likely to shut you out and go listen to whatever they want.

I don't want to be rude or anything. I'm just sharing my feelings. I really don't know if anyone else feels this way. If not, please correct my perceptions then it's a big misunderstanding. If anyone else feels the same way, maybe it's something that should be managed.

OK, here is the first 100 songs on Rolling Stones list of the Greatest 500 Songs of all time.

<snip long list>

Now, anybody can make a poll and make it come out anyway they want. But that doesn't mean that polls aren't meaningful. I have no idea how they came up with this list. Maybe albums sold, maybe they questioned people, who knows? But how many rappers do you see on this list? How many old geezer Classic Rock artists do you see?

Rolling Stone magazine? Don't you think a poll of their readership will be biased? How about doing a poll of readers of Ebony or maybe Reader's Digest? I think that the lists would be quite a bit different. It all comes down to who you ask.

If you have a look at your list you'll note also a number of songs from my generation (the GenX-ers) and lots of them were against the music of the 60's (e.g. the Clash and the Sex Pistols). If you had drawn up such a list in the late 70's or early 80's they wouldn't have made it. As my generation ages and more of the boomers pass on such lists will be tilted more towards the songs of my youth and then as my generation passes on they'll be filled with Puff Daddy, Nirvana, and Weezer.
I saw a list last year of the top 20 touring bands by earnings. Probably 15 of the bands were old Classic Rock bands. Somebody will argue, "well, the old geezers have lots of money and so they can attend these concerts". Well, when I was a teenager that was not the case. The old geezers in my time were not out-selling the modern artists of the time. Not even close.

Demographics. The boomers make up a very large chunk of the population and when they were young their choices carried a lot of weight and now in middle age and beyond (the very youngest boomer is 45 or so) their choices still carry a lot of weight. When those youngest boomers get a bit older I'm sure that wearing pants so that the waistband is somewhere between your belly button and your nipples will become the most popular style - still won't make it better.
There's a river in Egypt called "de Nile" .

That's something that doesn't seem to be in disagreement. The difference of opinion is over who is swimming in it.

I saw a list last year of the top 20 touring bands by earnings. Probably 15 of the bands were old Classic Rock bands. .

This is because these bands demand large sums of money to warrant putting their walking sticks aside, hitching up their colostomy bags and going out to rock moderately.

The recent police tour to australia (where i am from) made them 2 million dollars each. Just for Australia. I would say the main reason for this is that this was how much Sting was willing to talk to Andy Summers for.

The huge disposable income of the boomers generation means promoters can take a calculated risk by paying oldies this much, as they know that the old fans, along with some new, are gonna shell out the big bucks to see their "come around once every twenty years" favourites before they kick the bucket. The boomers were lucky enough not to be coming out of a massive depression when they were trying to earn their early dollars.

Musicians have a shorter life expectancy than volcanologists, lets face it, most of these guys are lucky to still be going the amount of drugs they've ingested over the years.

Don't get me wrong, I know my roots and respect my Elders, but they know more than anybody that the torch has been passed three or four times since they handed it over.

The huge disposable income of the boomers generation means promoters can take a calculated risk by paying oldies this much, as they know that the old fans, along with some new, are gonna shell out the big bucks to see their "come around once every twenty years" favourites before they kick the bucket.

Statements like this are simply a denial to see the plain facts. Give me a break, you really think people want to go see a bunch of "has-beens" play music simply because it was popular when they were teens? You really believe that? Sure, I'm gonna pay $200 bucks to stroke my ego.

And you really think that the reason probably 90% of the biggest and most successful radio stations play Classic Rock is because they are brainwashing the public??

Ridiculous. People pay good money to see good music. People are not stupid, they do not listen to radio stations that force music down their throats. They listen to music that sounds good to them. And I guarantee you that the majority of listeners to these Classic Rock stations are young people, not old.

Again, you can claim the reason Classic Rock bands are so successful is because their fans are going through a mid-life crisis. Truth is, they play better music, and this is why they draw the crowds and make the money.

But believe what you will.

Greg

I like lots of modern music. I know it is getting a little dated now, but I was a big fan of the Smashing Pumpkins, Alice In Chains, Nirvana and others. I like Korn. :D

I listen to modern music all the time. And some of it I like. And the good music will last. You still hear these groups today, though it's nearly 20 years. But you will not hear 99% of the rap songs 20 years from now on the radio.

You don't hear them now.

Like I said, you can claim that frozen pizza is as good as steak, but it doesn't make it so.

I feel like such a troll...

Nivana is arguable -- they had a lasting effect in terms of genre and produced a least a few lasting tunes. Not the Beatles, but not insignificant. I hear them all the time. You just get your music from the same tired old sources! Well programmed or recommended music is now found on satellite (Sirius and XM), Pandora, Slacker ... FM is tired and old. You are eating from a limited menu, Wes.

Why would you like Korn? (trolling, trolling ...)

Why do I like Korn? When they came out they were very fresh and original. Of course, everybody started copying them and their sound became the norm.

When I go down South to see my brother a few times a year, we listen to nothing but college radio. I probably listen to a much wider variety of music than you might expect. And I like a lot of the modern bands, just not rap.

Nobody is going to understand this, but this video tells the difference between early Rock N Roll and today. If you don't get it, I can't help you.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wvarPF5zlUA

There is a big difference between Rock back then and today if you look and listen closely. Some of you will see. :wink:

There is a big difference between Rock back then and today if you look and listen closely. Some of you will see. :wink:

:roll:

ATWFM is a great tune. This video is just mediocre propaganda.

I guarantee you that the majority of listeners to these Classic Rock stations are young people, not old.

Again, you can claim the reason Classic Rock bands are so successful is because their fans are going through a mid-life crisis. Truth is, they play better music, and this is why they draw the crowds and make the money.

But believe what you will.

Dude I love classic rock, don't get me wrong. I just think music has come a long way.

Obviously nobody is going to spend $200 to see music if it isn't good, I'm just saying the oldies can afford to charge that much because their main audience is willing and able to pay it.

To be honest most young people i know don't really listen to the radio that much anymore, its all online these days, which is why radio stations mostly play classic rock, most of their listeners want to hear it.

I know it seems like I was having a bit of a personal stab at you mate, I have no problem with good old fashioned rock, I just took offence to your stating that old music is better than the new stuff.

It kind of invalidates my attempts to be innovative and create new and interesting music if nothing is ever going to surpass lynnard skynnard.

I have heard you state before how Hendrix is so amazing because he was doing something new and exciting, well guess what, there is still new and exciting things being done by the next wave of young musicians, we have forty years of extra material to be inspired by that hendrix never had.

Classic rock is great, the world of guitar wouldn't be where it is today without the warriors of the past, but the world evolves, we learn from the past and use it to look to the future

I know it seems like I was having a bit of a personal stab at you mate, I have no problem with good old fashioned rock, I just took offence to your stating that old music is better than the new stuff. It kind of invalidates my attempts to be innovative and create new and interesting music if nothing is ever going to surpass lynnard skynnard.

What you are leaving out in your argument is that Wes has stated, way too many times, that what he said is his opinion and if Wes' opinion is going to invalidate anyones attempt at creating something fresh then they need a new outlook on their own music. Personally couldnt give ounce to what Wes thinks about my music when the sun sets.. (No offense Wes)

I am finding it funny that we spent, what, 12 pages to try to sway each others opinions. LOL

Jim