 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
68.3.130.219
In Reply to: RE: Interesting... posted by Sordidman on December 11, 2009 at 14:12:37
"Was living in Leeds shortly after the punk revolution. Which I regard as not a music movement, but a socio-political one. Of course, - that's in dispute, as perhaps its historical importance."
You IMO hit on a major element of what I think is the problem- Prior to 1970, I think people were able to separate the music from the politics and judge them separately....... But something changed in the 1970s...... People started using non-musical biases to judge the music as music, and it's been all downhill ever since.
"I recognize that we always think the best music was when we were 18. And since punk-rock was largely a rebellion against all things 70s, - I guess that that is weight on my head."
I don't know where this mindset came from, yet I've encountered it a lot here on AA...... I never had this urge to put music of my generation front and center, back in my teen years....... In spite of others doing it around me..........
"Punk Rock used music as a tool to reject the current music, and social values of that time."
You're probably correct here...... But some of it at one time (what was called "New Wave") still seemed interesting.......
"In the same sense that John Lydon, Clash, GofF and the Jam were rebellious: Chuck Berry, Carl Perkins, Bill Haley, were too. Even before Mick Jagger lost perspective and said that the new RS record sounded like Husker Du: (sic), in the late 80s; (the RS actually were 'shocking' and rebellious in 1968."
I think at one time, the style had an edge, wrapped around decent songwriting....... What I think changed is that the style (and lyrics) eventually became a *substitute* for good songwriting......... (I think John Lennon subconsciously transformed to this form of music making after his Beatles days.)
"Since HipHop, there is no more rebellion and it's just POP music."
Establishment or rebellion, the one thing that strikes me as lacking is **passion** behind the music. (I watch modern bands, and they seem **timid** on stage, compared to what I saw 20 to 30 years ago.) I think half the problem is peer pressure has forced people to listen to music for social reasons, and the musical element that drives the passion has become insufficient in recent time.
"Rock music has been 'disposable' for a long time,"
That's the problem...... It's not just rock...... **All** music has been treated as disposable. This peer pressure has discouraged younger people from exploring great music, regardless of era, in my humble opinion. The very element that I think would have sustained the passion I mentioned above.
"and in the grand scheme of things, my mind knows that the early 80s were really no better than the music of the early 70s, or mid 50s, - which I find not only distasteful, but distracting."
Tastes are tastes....... The worst anyone can do is disagree.........
"The facts on the ground are that wealthy Record Industry Executives exploited art and artists for their own benefit; and continue to do it; just in different ways. Any chance that I get to hurt them, (and get away with), I will."
I don't think it's the record labels, but the network media...... Those airing music to national audiences foster this peer pressure by dictating which music should or should not get exposure. The record label execs might try to influence these decisions via contributions to the networks, but until this monolith is broken (provided it ever will be), the fabrications who get airplay will be the only real music exposure the masses who cannot think outside the box will ever get.
I remember back in the 1960s, the network media was not overly restrictive with the type of music being aired. There were even a lot of classical concerts being aired in those days. I don't know what happened, but things changed drastically in the early 1970s, and it seems like the public no longer thought freely about music. And there, in my opinion, is the root of the travesty.
It would be great if people could think for themselves, and bypass the peer pressure and network restriction of music aired. The internet might have improved things, but I really don't know if the public acceptance of a *variety* of music (and music for the sake of music) will ever be the same.
Follow Ups:
""You IMO hit on a major element of what I think is the problem- Prior to 1970, I think people were able to separate the music from the politics and judge them separately....... But something changed in the 1970s...... People started using non-musical biases to judge the music as music, and it's been all downhill ever since.""
So, you think that music is there strictly for entertainment and not a part of any kind of social commentary, or educational tool, or any kind of dissemination of political, educational, or socio-economic learning tool?
If so, - i think exactly the opposite. Especially in the USA where we have one of the worst, and most biased, press-corp and corrupt corporate controlled media in the world, - it used-to-be very important to me that we had an alternative, and this punk-rock, and the post-punk-rock, - educational-media-news-through-rock vehicle was a good way to get it.
With the fact that music lost its relevance as entertainment, and importance to counter the biases of the press, and the worsening of the biases of the media; things have gotten really bad: (read, American Idol).
Ambition makes you look pretty ugly.
Kicking squealing gucci little piggy
“So, you think that music is there strictly for entertainment and not a part of any kind of social commentary, or educational tool, or any kind of dissemination of political, educational, or socio-economic learning tool?”
I think that’s the primary function of music……… And that’s how I personally enjoy music. Even if there is a political or social message, I judge the music separately from the message. And at one time, I often cited great music in spite of disagreeing with the message. (The Clash and Rammstein come to mind.)
Note that I also have no problem with the “learning tool” aspect in music, where people learn how music is constructed, and appreciation of the various musical styles.
I think the heart of music’s decline is the fact the pure art of musical composition has taken a back seat to the social or the political messages, and if stripped of these messages, there really isn’t much left.
“If so, - i think exactly the opposite. Especially in the USA where we have one of the worst, and most biased, press-corp and corrupt corporate controlled media in the world,”
No argument about the bias………. I agree with you there totally………… (Now we might disagree over *how* the media is biased.)
“ - it used-to-be very important to me that we had an alternative, and this punk-rock, and the post-punk-rock, - educational-media-news-through-rock vehicle was a good way to get it.”
I see punk rock as an element of a much bigger picture…………….
In my opinion, the most important element of music is simply one hearing a song or composition for the first time, and falling in love with the song or composition…………… Regardless of style, genre, or era.........
“With the fact that music lost its relevance as entertainment, and importance to counter the biases of the press, and the worsening of the biases of the media; things have gotten really bad: (read, American Idol).”
I think we need to let go of the “relevance” and once again treat music as music……… The relevance should enhance music’s popularity, not dictate it.
Everyone's entitled to their opinion, but have you ever listened to a John Lennon album all the way through? And if so, which one?
And with regard to modern bands being timid: Who have you seen live this year? And, youtube doesn't count.
"Everyone's entitled to their opinion, but have you ever listened to a John Lennon album all the way through? And if so, which one?""Milk and Honey", most memorably. ......
"And with regard to modern bands being timid: Who have you seen live this year? And, youtube doesn't count."
As if seeing a timid band live would somehow cast a different impression........ (I saw such an act opening for Porcupine Tree a couple years ago. The audience didn't even pay attention to the performance. The performer concluded that he wasn't doing anything for the audience, and cut the act short. And nobody in the audience cared.) I wish I had such disposable funds to do this. This is why I love YouTube.
In fact, I think the best way to demonstrate new bands (or any band) is to link live clips to YouTube. Any apprehension to doing this only shows lack of confidence in whoever is recommended!! (Dave C. has dug up hidden Aussie gems, by the way.)
That said, there *are* some new bands with the passion....... The hard part is finding them. (My only concern about Inward Eye is the debut studio album didn't really showcase the band like the video footage.)
Edits: 12/13/09
"Milk & Honey" was a hodge podge of leftover tracks released by Yoko in 1984, four years after John Lennon died! It's hardly representative of his output after The Beatles demise.....
"As if seeing a timid band live would somehow cast a different impression........ (I saw such an act opening for Porcupine Tree a couple years ago. The audience didn't even pay attention to the performance. The performer concluded that he wasn't doing anything for the audience, and cut the act short. And nobody in the audience cared.) I wish I had such disposable funds to do this. This is why I love YouTube."
I'm not quite sure what you mean by the first part of your response. I was wondering what source of reference you have to make such a statement as:
"Establishment or rebellion, the one thing that strikes me as lacking is **passion** behind the music. (I watch modern bands, and they seem **timid** on stage, compared to what I saw 20 to 30 years ago.)"
I can empathize with the expense concern, but when you make such a blanket statement you should have something to back it up. I love youtube too Todd, but it's no replacement for the live experience.
i remember back in the late 60s,early 70s when FM radio station DJ's played pretty much whatever they wanted similar to today's college stations. and commonly a DJ would play an entire LP side straight thru. by the 80s FM was not much better than AM. I agree New Wave was the best music from the early 80s.
"...the network media...... Those airing music to national audiences foster this peer pressure by dictating which music should or should not get exposure" - i assume you are talking about music shows on TV here, i dont watch much TV, but it seems about right.
"...remember back in the 1960s, the network media was not overly restrictive with the type of music being aired. There were even a lot of classical concerts being aired in those days. I don't know what happened, but things changed drastically in the early 1970s, and it seems like the public no longer thought freely about music. And there, in my opinion, is the root of the travesty." - yes most people these days seem to have VERY limited music circles, what really strikes me as funny is when they tell me i need to "open my music horizons" when i state that i dont like some certain newer music they happen to listen to, like huh? i listen to classical from the middle ages to present, ragtime, blues from turn of the century to present, reggae, zedeco, cajan, traditional indian and japasese, folk, celtic, new age, electronic, and pop/rock from the 50s to present, and i am the closed (musically) minded one?.
Post a Followup:
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2013, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
[ Take5 ]
