Ness K Vs. Cover Bands

Music is an art that's not quantifiable in my opinion as good or bad, because there is no way to measure that. All that you can really say at the end of the day is that you either like it or not.

So if you like the Beatles that's great but it's your opinion only (maybe many others) but opininons don't make it right nor can you say that the music is better.

For me the lines aren't all black and white. I like alot of classic rock and some Beatles etc., and I like alot of modern stuff. In reality even some of the bands that I consider as my favorites I don't like all their music.

All these polls etc mean absolutely nothing. They're just someone's opininon. So becuase there's a list in Rolling Stone that has classic rock songs at the top doesn't validate that music. Don't even be that naieve to think that they actually polled anyone, for all you know some guy sat there and wrote the list himself.

I don't beleive the majority of young people like classic rock over what's out there today. Are there kids that do? Sure there are, it would be foolish to think not..but those are the minority and my bet is they like that mainly because they heard their parents playing it when they grew up. If a young person today never heard calssic rock being played the chances of them liking it over what's being played today would be slim.

if Wes' opinion is going to invalidate anyones attempt at creating something fresh then they need a new outlook on their own music.

sorry, misunderstanding. It's not wes' opinion that would invalidate my art, but the hypothetical assumption that music has peaked and is now on an inevitable decline.

To rephrase more plainly: If it were true that music reached it's peak in the 70's and 80's it would invalidate my attempts at creating new and innovative music.

I agree that its all opinions, but this forum is under opinions and polls, so thats kinda the point.

Personally i just love the fun of getting into it with people from all over the world in serious musical discussions, be they conflicts or musings.

I'm here just having fun with all this, while I may sometimes come off as sounding serious, i assure you i'm having a ball. The more witty the retorts, the more fun i have in the debates. I'm hoping i can eventually get some of my long standing ideas challenged on here in ways that make me rethink my position on certain issues.

Happy posting;)

Ah, I did misunderstand. I think it would be naive to think that music has peaked and can never get any better. I dont even think Wes would say that, although I probably shouldnt speak for him. But like someone else said, I dont think music is something that be labeled as good or bad. I am "king of the obvious" but its kind of just what you like and dont. :)

I'm not harping on ya. Debate can be a fun thing as long as it doesnt turn ugly. I think that is one of the best things about this site is that people can USUALLY debate and not get too personal. Although, I have seen it go ugly a couple times. WOOO

Anyway, I've enjoyed your postings Spides so dont think I am beating on you.

Jim

not at all man, definitely feelin the love bro.

I hate when things go personal as well. No argument was ever "won" by getting nasty. Facts, stats and personal experience is the only thing worth citing in these things (tho i may have got a little harsh on the walking stick line)

I'm thrilled to find somewhere to discuss the one thing I know a little about... MUSIC

I promise you'll be hearing more from me ;)

Enlightened by several more knowledgeable posters,
I am reconsidering the worthiness of rap in our mundane lives.
So, to pay for my slights to the rap world, and demonstrate my open minded
attitude on rap, here is my Rap on Bots
(actually something that I came up with and posted a few months ago –
and a recent post on another board reminded me of it -
OK, I'm a closet rapper)

Bot, Bot, uninvited guest
Some consider you a pest
A voyeur peeking
Key words seeking
Into a Forum you crawl
Lurking about ye shall
On our posts feast
Morph a winged beast
And ungratefully fly
With no 'Hello' or 'Goodbye'
Contributing naught
Oh dreadful Bot.

Redeeming myself for rapping rap?,
KR2

OK, first, my opinion is just that, my opinion. As I have written several times, I realize that many do not agree with me, and I think that is a very good thing.

I do think Rock music peaked around 1970, but I am not saying the musicians of yesteryear were better. In fact, I believe the musicians today are far more skilled generally. But songwriting was much better back then. And in large part that is because of the music industry itself. In the late 60's and early 70's, musicians were pretty much allowed to go in the studio and do whatever they wanted. They were in charge. And this is why there was so many great songs in this period. But then the industry stepped in and told the bands what to play. This is when creativity and originality went down the drain. And it has been this way for many years. In the very late 80's and early 90's there was another creative spurt with the Alternative or Grunge movement. There was a lot of GREAT music that came out. But then the industry stepped in again and forced bands to conform to what they thought would sell. They made records by formula. And this is still happening today.

I don't know if anybody watched the video I posted of Mott the Hoople. I think what people will hear and see in that video is that music was a lot more fun back in the 50's, 60's, and 70's. You don't really see crowds having fun anymore. About 10 years ago you saw crowds in the Mosh Pit, this was closer to violence than fun. But early Rock N Roll was fun, a lot more fun than music of today in my opinion. It was rebellious yes, but it had a sense of humor too. I don't feel or see that in Rock music today. Go back and watch that video with all the old clips. Look how much fun people were having and ask yourself if that's what you see today. I don't think you see that much now. Rock felt more youthful then, now it feels old. I think the artists of today need to go back to their roots and recapture that early enthusiasm and fun.

Here is that video, listen and see for yourself:

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

And this is why I think the old Classic bands are pulling in the bigger crowds and making more money. The music was more enjoyable. Check out this video of Neil Young, look how much FUN the crowd is having, this music made them feel good.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fBS3B2cZcFM&feature=related

But I believe the young people today could do this as well if they realized this is what the music is missing.

Just my 2 cents.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xm9e9NWF7aM&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xJxnFSYAVUE&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a6ma35RVhP4&feature=related

This crowd seems to be having fun to me. Especially the last link, I was at that show.

I do recognize your opinion Wes and it's one the older generation seems to share. Like the making records of bands that sell records. Never got that. To say record companies are there to expand people's horizons, make people feel warm and fuzzy inside or whatever reason lifts the bands from the days of yore up just sounds naive to me. Record companies, like any business, is in the business of making money. If I own a record label I'm not going to sign a bad that won't sell records because they are different, political or whatever, unless of course people will buy records because of it. Sorry but if I told a band on my label "do what you want, I don't care if you sell records" it's just bad business. I'm sure some companies put on some altruistic facade to make it look like their goal is to spread great music and innovate, but are really just selling paint by numbers music. That there, is good business.

I still believe there is this brainwashing going on to steer all new guitarists to the same type of music. Talking about how music was better back then and the reasons why haven't really changed in the 3 years I've played guitar. If you don't think today's music is innovative, that's fine but always coming back to the same music over and over again. I don't believe dumping the past is the way to move forward but if their isn't a broader view there won't be innovation. And these bands are not innovative. Sure they were in the 1960's, but it's 2008 so now I hear it and I'm like "seems like a novel idea but I've heard it many times before."

We have more tools are our disposal than ever. With a touch of a button on your guitar you can kill the sound, control an effects processor or even the stage lighting. If I want to loop a sound ala Pink Floyd Money, I can do that in a matter of minutes on a computer rather than miles of tape. I can jam with people around the world and have unlimited access to all musical knowledge from my living room. I'm sure some will argue that we have all these tools to go in all these directions but aren't. But if that's the case, does going back to the same era and genre of music really help?

songwriting was much better back then. And in large part that is because of the music industry itself. In the late 60's and early 70's, musicians were pretty much allowed to go in the studio and do whatever they wanted. They were in charge. And this is why there was so many great songs in this period. But then the industry stepped in and told the bands what to play. This is when creativity and originality went down the drain.

I beg to differ. The industry has never been LESS in control than they are right at this moment.

With the advent of Mp3s and most of the youth moving from the industry controlled radio stations to the internet for their music,
as well as the massive advances in recording equipment and the availability of said equipment, most good bands these days are completely bypassing the industry and taking a DIY approach to music, much like the punk bands of the 70's but to a much greater extent.

A great example of this is the band Wilco. Not overly great songs i'll admit but thats not my point. They were signed on to Sony and told to go into the studio and record an albulm their way. no industry figures breathing down their necks. They did this, but Sony decided they didn't like the end result so they dumped them, said you can have the recording, do with it what you will.

So they did, and were starting to get quite a few sales and a fair amount of public interest all off their own bat. A small-ish label, a subsidiary of sony unaware of what had gone on, approached them and paid 50 million dollars to buy the rights to the albulm.

It flopped.

Summary: Wilco made 100% of the profits of what they sold privately.
Sony gave wilco the recording so they had not a cent to recoup to them.
They also recieved 50 million dollars for a recording that sony had earlier turned down, and which ended up doing fairly mediocre in the charts.
Wilco 1: Industry 0

This is one example of how bands these days do not rely on the record industry to succeed like they did in the 60's/70's/80's.

Pro-tools. To get a basic Mbox setup of pro-tools, you are only looking at about $1000 australian. This program is an INDUSTRY STANDARD! this means that within reason, you should be able to create recordings that stand up in the current marketplace without having to get a loan from a label to go get their choice of overpriced producer, use their choice of guitars and amps, in their flashy overseas studio, just because the label wants you to. You can do it in your bedroom.

Especially with reasons new combinator drum sound program which has samples of something like eight different drummers, hitting the drums in all different velocities, on a variety of different kits, as recorded by a variety of different microphones, set up, eq'd and fx'd by 12 different top of the line producers, all of these fully programmed options to choose from, and controlled within Reason from a separate mixer to the main mix so you can play with the mix of the kick/snare/overheads/junk mics etc. You can get a million dollar drum sound every time just by using a midi controller keyboard. And before anyone talks about the human-ness of the sound, it's got a humkanise function that randomises the velocities within parameters that you set so it sounds like a real player.

There are also guitar input programs where you can choose from a variety of amp heads and cabs, type of mic used on amp, where the mic is aimed, position of the mic in the room, which stompboxes you are using, etc. so you can get a proffessional guitar sound going direct in to the m-box.

then it's just a matter of posting the trax on myspace, getting enough followers and then gigging and selling your cds as merch for 100% profit untill the labels get antsy and come to you begging for your custom, and giving you whatever you want coz they need you, not vice versa.

Bands have more artistic license today than ever before, and they have the means by which to use it. Plus, like I've said before, 30 or 40 years more music to listen to and be influenced by than the 60's, 70's and 80's guys. Their influence includes these, but is not limited to it.
early Rock N Roll was fun, a lot more fun than music of today in my opinion. It was rebellious yes, but it had a sense of humor too. I don't feel or see that in Rock music today. Rock felt more youthful then, now it feels old. I think the artists of today need to go back to their roots and recapture that early enthusiasm and fun.

And this is why I think the old Classic bands are pulling in the bigger crowds and making more money. The music was more enjoyable.

But I believe the young people today could do this as well if they realized this is what the music is missing.

You just haven't been going to the right gigs. Come down to Australia and see my band play. It's not super innovative sure, but it's fun. We have crowd participation, we get people up onstage to dance, we sometimes wear costumes and we always make sure everybody has a good time.

There are bands where there are mosh pits yeah. But ask the guys at that show if they had fun. The answer will probably be something like "yeah man that was the craziest pit ever, awesome."

Different bands appeal to different audiences, and as entertainers, try to cater to what that audience wants and needs. Hardcore kids like to get their negative energy out with a bunch of people doing the same. It's actually quite a cathartic experience. And hardcore is great because things like the straight edge movement are all designed as ways to set positive, drug free role models for the kids from bad environments to look upto, so they don't end up chroming on the street. if you look at the role models of the 60's 70's and 80's rock scenes, I daresay a lot of them probably weren't the most positive.

Basically the music scene has evolved. A lot. Some things remain the same. Some things improve. Some things get worse. But i think it's perhaps a bit foolhardy to say the songwriting from any one period of time is any better or worse than any other. it's all different and it's all relevant to somebody.

Anyway as you said yourself, we're talking about opinions here so this is mine.

Can't wait for the reply, really enjoying this little back and forth.

And don't think i don't like you, you seem like a really rad dude, some of my closest friends tend to give me some of the fiercest debates tho ;)

oh by the way here is a great example of some sample based electronic music that is pushing the boundaries and using the technology at our disposal. This consists entirely of recordings of different balls bouncing off different surfacesa.

He has time extended, pitch shifted and torn to shreds the original sounds to create something incredible

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ytaeyWQCCw

I think this thread is getting into a debate based on personal preference which I don't think can be argued with any type of facts.

It all comes down to what you like. There is no way to quantify what music is better or worse because all music is different to every listener.

I would agree with Wes about the music industry pushing bands down certain paths, but those are only the bands that are hooked up with a major label. Now a days anyone can cut a CD in their basement and there's no one to tell them what to play.

Music evolves all the time. Wes I think if you step back and look at some of the statements you've made this is the same thing our parents probably were saying when Rock n Roll came around. " Look all the people screaming and yelling how could that be fun". "Or music was so much better during the big band era" Of course there is no way to prove or disprove that argument but that argument is all based on opinion and not facts, mainly becuase there are no facts avaiable to support it.

I grew up with classic rock but I'm not in love with it, as a matter of fact I get bored with things easily and for the most part I don't want to listen to 40-50 year old songs. I've heard them a million times and for the most part they are played out. But that's me. I'm not into pictures either for that matter. I'd rather live in the here and now then live in the past. The past is over it's time to move on. The Beatles were great int he late 60's but that was over 40 years ago.

I think what we all can agree on is that we all love music be it classic rock or emo and we are all tied together because of our love for playing the guitar.

To quote Rodney King.."Can't we all just get along"

But Wes you still rock dude!!

Look, the facts are this:

SRV, Jimi, Steve Vai, Joe Satriani , Frank Zappa and Dream Theater are the only people on earth that have ever made any good music. Rap isn't music. Period. Hip hop is artificialy flavored music. If anyone listens to anything else other than the above stated artists, you are wrong for doing so. :P

Blueline,

That would be correct if your were wearing a pair of button fly jeans which I don't think you were at the time so that invalidates that statement.

Woah, ya wander off for a bit and this thread doubles in size...
Kent: Art cannot merely be definied as 'whatever whomever decides is art', everything is partly definied by what it is not else there would be no point in having the word. If everyone is called John it doesnt make sense to call someone John in hopes of sperating one from the rest. Take this example:

A brilliantly skilled stonecutter, a true genius, makes two amazing and completely similar statues. One of them he calls 'art', and he has it send to the fanciest musea in the world. The second he just calls a funnily shaped rock, he keeps it in the basement. After a while he asks for the first statue to be send back to him and he places it next to the second one, which had never left the basement. Now you walk into the basement and see the two identical statues standing next to each other. According to you one is art and the other is not, even though you have absolutely no way to judge which one is art and which one isn't except by asking the artist. And if he lies and says the second one is art the statue that once was art now isn't, so the musea retrospectively exhibited non-art: a mere rock.

Surely you agree we need a better definition, atleast one that allows museum curators to wake up every day without having to fear a few artist decided that their entire exhibition was now considered worthless?

Just because an artist decided that his creation is art, doesn't mean that :
1) it's good art (and who gets to make that decision?)
2) anyone else thinks it's art
Surely you agree we need a better definition, atleast one that allows museum curators to wake up every day without having to fear a few artist decided that their entire exhibition was now considered worthless?

Ya got a better definition? :wink:
atleast one that allows museum curators to wake up every day without having to fear a few artist decided that their entire exhibition was now considered worthless?
Just because the artist changes his mind, doesn't mean anyone else has to change theirs...

I think the main point i am trying to make here is not that new stuff is better, or that old stuff is worse, it's that it's all important and it all has its place.

Noone can say that for any reason old stuff is more valid or better written nor can i say new stuff is that.

the point is music is an ever evolving entity, sometimes you need to listen to the older stuff to get a better understanding of the newer stuff, but it is important to keep your ears open and be taken along for the ride because if you don't, you wake up one day and realise that you don't understand what is happening because you missed about 15-20 years of innovation.

OMG
13 pages!?
Will it ever end?
Ness K, you should be commended or lynched.
The jury is out as to whether you will be famous or infamous on this forum.