|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
209.157.148.112
In Reply to: Best of 2005 posted by mamater on December 12, 2005 at 18:11:14:
after being corrected that "Bliss" wasn't even released in 2005, - I'm hard pressed to find 5 CDs that i can even call good... :-(
"Swimming in the river that floods the neighborhood, I could call to you, but it would do no good"
Follow Ups:
Just off the top of my headErin Mckeown - And We Will Become Like Birds
The Kills - No Wow
Lucinda Williams - Live at the Fillmore
And They Will Know Us By the Trail of the Dead - Worlds Apart
Kathleen Edwards - Back to Me
The Knitters - Modern Sounds of the Knitters
X - Live in Los Angeles
Rent Soundtrack
Sleater Kinney - The Woods
Sonny Landreth - Grant Street
I'm not sure how much of this stuff is going to make it on to any long time pop/rock fans top 100 list but after 50 years it's only natural that that becomes a tougher nut to crack from one year to the next. The Rent soundtrack is pretty damn good and as far a soundtrack LPs goes it's truly excellent - so was Kill Bill vol. 1 from a couple of years ago.I don't get as much time to find good music as I used but the stuff I've found this year is pretty damn good - what I wonder about is the stuff that I've missed. I'm sure there plenty of other great stuff released this year that I'll discover someday.
I too, discover stuff later that ended up being released in previous years......I may have even whined here about how crappy 2004 was only to discover Bliss, and Ojos de Brujo later in 2005.
Plus, - I may have a broad liking for music that I find as being "OK." And, perhaps I have too narrow a liking for music that I find as being "great."
I also define "Hip Pop" as newer music, by newer artists: X and Rush could possibly make "new," "creative" music, but I can't place them in this category, whereas New Order, - all they've been around a long time too, - are doing "Hip Pop," if that makes any sense...
"Swimming in the river that floods the neighborhood, I could call to you, but it would do no good"
Not sure how to take your response. Surely it's a rare day indeed when I play a record the first time to recognize it as excellent. More likely than not if I think a record is great at first listen, even if I maintain that perception for a period of months, in the long run it will prove less than satisfying.A great record is great independent of time. Though I considered Born in the USA and Combat Rock great records upon first listen and over a period of months in the long run they've proven, at least from my POV, not to be even ok records.
Usually if I consider a record good at first listen and over time it maintains such a status it's a worthwhile record. Greatness is kind of a relative thing and often records I consider great will over time become dated or even "stupid".
"I also define 'Hip Pop' as newer music, by newer artists: X and Rush could possibly make 'new,' 'creative' music, but I can't place them in this category, whereas New Order, - all they've been around a long time too, - are doing 'Hip Pop,' if that makes any sense..."Although it is newer music, I view it a little differently. I view it as any pop or rock material that was first released recently, even if the band itself is one of the old warhorses. For judging what is "creative" or "hip" is totally subjective. It's not too difficult to be creative, but it is difficult to compose a product that delivers musical satisfaction.
Otherwise we'd have hundreds of bands comparable to the Beatles....
I think while a lot of newer bands may indeed be creative, the overall musical effect just leaves me flat. The creativity may be there, but not the quality of composition.
I hear you and very much respect that......And, appreciate the classifications, independent of previous genre/work.
This is all really difficult to define as I agree with you that it's difficult to be creative, to even define creativity, and/or define what makes a good composition. (At least those definitions are unique to the individual making the definition). If you take a band like Yes: I would consider them to be quite creative, and talented musicians/soloists, but poor songwriters, at least poor concise songwriters. (Although I did think that they wrote some good songs).
I think that it's interesting that Groove Armada's CD "Love Box" would be considered "new" music and probably fit into this category, although it has a huge Beatles influence. I would not consider the Train CD as applying to "Hip Hop" because although this CD was released recently, they are essentially playing Fleetwood Mac/Van Morrison, regurgitated.
So, - I guess that I am a hypocrite and am applying my subjective tastes to something that should be a more objective category.... No matter how old Peter Gabriel and his music gets, - I will always consider his work, (whether I like it or not), creative Hip Pop. No matter what Tom Petty does, - I could never put him on this board: (well, maybe if he made a CD with the Prodigy)!! :-) :-0
Apologies...
Happy New Year Todd.....
"Swimming in the river that floods the neighborhood, I could call to you, but it would do no good"
No need to apologize.... Your view is equally valid!!!! It's more of a personal view.... I respect yours like you respect mine!The other thing I'll say is there's nothing wrong with a "Beatles influence".... ;^]
Glad you mentioned Worlds Apart. I also thought it was a mighty good release, to bad it got a little snubbed.
Good record BTW!
Give me rhythm or give me death!
"I'm hard pressed to find 5 CDs that i can even call good... :-("Rush - "R30"
Kraftwerk - "Minimum-Maximum"
Sufjan Stevens - "Illinoise"
Porcupine Tree - "Deadwing"
Coldplay - "X&Y"(The Petrucci/Rudess album I cited before was released in 2004, not 2005.)
| ||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: