You are here

What's gone wrong with Popular Music?

For everything after the recording stage: hardware/software and how you use it.

What's gone wrong with Popular Music?

Postby Howdy Doody Time » Sun Feb 26, 2012 2:32 pm


Listening to hit records from the 1960's in the car with my wife (who comes from a remote island where they haven't even heard of the Beatles) and she loved every song, and is right now blasting them out in her study.

I got to thinking about that just now, and wondered why. I mean she loves modern dance music and bops about to that no end, but the 60's stuff she wants to really listen to.

I realised that (except for the conversion to CD) this was all recorded on tape, by people who spent years learning the trade, using specialist equipment that cost an absolute fortune, in fabulous studios usually in London, where Tom Dick and Harry would never be able to afford to record.

So maybe those that were sponsored to be recorded there by these experts had a much harder road to travel, and consequently had to be better, much better, than their counterparts today, who basically record themselves and post to You Tube or Facebook.

Or am I being a boring old fart with no idea of how good todays music is?



:? :? :?
User avatar
Howdy Doody Time
Regular
Posts: 358
Joined: Sun Jan 18, 2009 12:00 am
Location: Huai Yai, Chon Buri, Siam

The only excuse we have for making music in the first place is to make it differently..vis-a-vis our own difference (Glenn Gould)


Re: What's gone wrong with Popular Music?

Postby OneWorld » Sun Feb 26, 2012 3:51 pm

I think it's the downside of living in times of plenty.

We all have an evermore impressive array of technology at our disposal, so much so that a dis-proportionate amount of time is spent getting 'that sound' rather than as you say, learning your trade. Look at the Beatles' harmony and it can be quite complex. I make the analogy with buildings. Look at one built long time in the past, the detail is much more intricate, they were built by artisans, now we just throw up breeze blocked lumps, which yes can be eye-catching, but the visual impact is novel but not impressive.

Now consider music made on a computer, it too uses blocks, it becomes quite formulaic, a song can be knocked together in no time at all, by getting a beat going, then knocking a few chords together, copy and paste it etc but it is equally forgettable.

I was out the other night with a mate who was saying that today's music is equally memorable as say the Beatles, I then asked him to sing/whistle back any of the tunes we had just heard in the club, and he couldn't remember a single one, then I said now do the same with a Beatles song, and of course he could mention loads of them.

To write, I have started getting the guitar out again, where different chording and phrasing can be experimented with, more complex arrangements to give the tune variety and what I hope is, a little more piquancy, everything is focussed on music making instead of 'sound design'

That is not to say that a 2 chord trick cannot be impressive, as a piece of music, it might be a track written specifically for the dance market, the songs that seemlessly blend into each other. But it is quite refreshing and much more impressive to watch/listen to someone who has mastery of their craft and plays a tune that takes you somewhere, with both lyrical, melodic and harmonic integrity rather than just trotting out another 134bpm mono-chorder where the only dynamics are the breakdown.

Will there ever be another Beatles, Floyd, Gershwin, Porter, Stevie Wonder, Jagger/Richard, Holland/Dozier, Dylan?
OneWorld
Frequent Poster
Posts: 2060
Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2009 11:00 pm

Re: What's gone wrong with Popular Music?

Postby Ed_J90 » Sun Feb 26, 2012 3:54 pm

Copy & Paste from an old post of mine:

"years ago to get into a studio to record you either had to have a rich daddy, some substance or have something that people wanted to listen to"
User avatar
Ed_J90
Regular
Posts: 364
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 12:00 am

Re: What's gone wrong with Popular Music?

Postby desmond » Sun Feb 26, 2012 4:26 pm

Howdy Doody Time wrote:I realised that (except for the conversion to CD) this was all recorded on tape, by people who spent years learning the trade, using specialist equipment that cost an absolute fortune, in fabulous studios usually in London, where Tom Dick and Harry would never be able to afford to record

...and by people who knew how to write, shock horror, *actual songs*...
User avatar
desmond
Jedi Poster
Posts: 6656
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 12:00 am

mu:zines | music magazine archive
Vintage issues of Sound On Sound, Electronics & Music Maker, Music Technology and more...


Re: What's gone wrong with Popular Music?

Postby Phil O » Sun Feb 26, 2012 5:07 pm

I am not sure you're comparing like with like HDT. The Beatles were exceptional even for the time. You can't really compare them to the average 'bedroom jockey'. There are some well crafted with great production out there. Adele, Cee Lo Green, Pink even some Katy Perry material. These are a better comparison.

Yes. There plenty of mediocre material being put out but not everything falls into this category.
Phil O
Frequent Poster
Posts: 781
Joined: Tue Sep 02, 2003 11:00 pm
Location: Scotland

 


Re: What's gone wrong with Popular Music?

Postby nathanscribe » Sun Feb 26, 2012 5:17 pm

It's not the tools per se, it's who uses them and how. It's perfectly possible to make great music using a computer as your central tool, and yes you're right in that it's easy to make bad music, or at least unimaginative music, with one too - but it's also very easy to make unimaginative music with a guitar and a drummer and a vocalist.

Access to the tools is wider than ever, so there will be a greater noise floor, so to speak. But it's silly to say there's no good music being made, and to assume that means the death of quality, when that quality is there - but perhaps hidden behind a wall of more generic stuff.

The analogy with building is kind of nice but flawed - there are both aesthetic and financial reasons for decorative detail to be present or absent. The Romans invented concrete - the Pantheon is half made from the stuff, and that's hardly a piece of rubbish. So it's not simply the materials, or the tools - it's a question of creative choice. Many people don't devote themselves to furthering their abilities in refining their creative choices in whatever endeavour they specialise - and there are financial reasons why a lot of tedious crud is pumped out. Look at the popularity of MacDonalds. Same goes for art.
User avatar
nathanscribe
Frequent Poster
Posts: 873
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 12:00 am
Location: Wakefield, for my sins.

I have no idea what I'm doing.


Re: What's gone wrong with Popular Music?

Postby Gone To Lunch » Sun Feb 26, 2012 9:59 pm

The Beatles and others of their generation had put in thousands upon thousands of hours perfecting their craft before recording, which was typically of a mostly live performance, at least to begin with. In contrast to using software to construct a fantasy of a marketing executive fantasy of a 'commercial' product.

Also, DJs had more freedom about what they played, and thus could support something they emotionally identified with now. In contrast to a marketing executive fantasy of a 'commercial' playlist.
Gone To Lunch
Frequent Poster
Posts: 628
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2004 11:00 pm
Location: London

Re: What's gone wrong with Popular Music?

Postby Howdy Doody Time » Mon Feb 27, 2012 2:31 am


Point taken. I mentioned the Beatles more as a yardstick to show how little exposure my missus had to 1960's music (ie none). What she is suddenly addicted to is Melanie's version of Ruby Tuesday, Manfred Mann's Pretty Flamingo, Sandie Shaw's Puppet on a String, and Herman Hermits A Must to Avoid, - among many others.

It's interesting because she has no preconception, no family to tell her that stuff was great which would allow her to rebel against it, she is just listening to it with no baggage, and loving it, and I'm trying to make sense of that. I love it of course but then I would because grew up with it. It just seems that there's something missing these days, maybe naked unashamed talent on both sides of the microphone.
User avatar
Howdy Doody Time
Regular
Posts: 358
Joined: Sun Jan 18, 2009 12:00 am
Location: Huai Yai, Chon Buri, Siam

The only excuse we have for making music in the first place is to make it differently..vis-a-vis our own difference (Glenn Gould)


Re: What's gone wrong with Popular Music?

Postby BJG145 » Mon Feb 27, 2012 8:44 am

Howdy Doody Time wrote:I mean she loves modern dance music and bops about to that no end, but the 60's stuff she wants to really listen to...maybe those that were sponsored to be recorded there by these experts had a much harder road to travel, and consequently had to be better, much better, than their counterparts today, who basically record themselves and post to You Tube or Facebook.

I doubt if she dances to a lot of random stuff uploaded by unknown bedroom producers though, does she...? Most commercial material is still recorded by experts with expensive equipment.

I'm not aware that it's any easier to get Radio 1 airplay than it used to be, or that radio artists are selected on the basis of musical advancement. It's just changing fashion.
User avatar
BJG145
Frequent Poster
Posts: 2995
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 11:00 pm
Location: Norwich UK

 


Re: What's gone wrong with Popular Music?

Postby Shambolic Charm » Mon Feb 27, 2012 9:43 am

I have an increasing sense that there is a decrease of melodic range in mainstream music as time goes on. Listening to many modern songs they are basically floating around 3 or 4 notes. Also one idea makes a song now where as prior to the 80's many ideas would be combines. for instance, the nanana melody of hey Jude would these days be a song in itself and not an outro. To me many of the songs sound to me like they need more time and work on them. they have the basic sketch but that has become the finished song!I guess it makes money so no-one is worried but that is in part because the whole commercial system is sown up. the music spoon fed through an increasingly tight media. On the other side there are a lot of very creative artists under the media radar, playing in small pubs and the like. I feel in the past they would have got more credit and would have been at least on the periphery of Radio and TV. strangely enough some mainstream drama programs do play the more creative side of modern music. Programs like Waterloo road and skins being examples.
User avatar
Shambolic Charm
Frequent Poster
Posts: 674
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 11:00 pm

Re: What's gone wrong with Popular Music?

Postby Samurai Jack » Mon Feb 27, 2012 10:00 am

also, time is an excellent filter: the good stuff sticks around. the rubbish stuff falls by the wayside. i would wager that there was an equal amount of rubbish floating around in the 60s and 70s but has long since been forgotten.

the only problem with that is if time is going to filter out all the rubbish, what will that leave us with? maybe not so much...
User avatar
Samurai Jack
Poster
Posts: 48
Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2004 11:00 pm

Re: What's gone wrong with Popular Music?

Postby James Perrett » Mon Feb 27, 2012 10:26 am

Samurai Jack wrote:also, time is an excellent filter: the good stuff sticks around. the rubbish stuff falls by the wayside. i would wager that there was an equal amount of rubbish floating around in the 60s and 70s but has long since been forgotten.

Very true - we didn't have much pop music in our house in the 60's until I found Radio Luxembourg around 1969. When I heard a tape of the early days of Radio 1 a few years later I was amazed at how many songs I didn't recognise because they hadn't been played on the radio since they were in the charts. Actually, I don't think I've ever heard things like The Move's 'Fire Brigade' since listening to those tapes.

James.
James Perrett
Moderator
Posts: 5986
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 11:00 pm
Location: The wilds of Hampshire

JRP Music - Audio Mastering and Restoration.
http://www.jrpmusic.co.uk


Re: What's gone wrong with Popular Music?

Postby Scramble » Mon Feb 27, 2012 10:44 am

This is probably the flimsiest pretext for a old vs modern music thread I've ever seen! :)

>Actually, I don't think I've ever heard things like The Move's 'Fire Brigade' since listening to those tapes.

You lucky man. I have to listen it every day at the moment thanks to my boy taking a liking to it (it's great though, really, as are all The Move's singles).
Scramble
Frequent Poster
Posts: 2285
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2002 11:00 pm

 


Re: What's gone wrong with Popular Music?

Postby MarkOne » Mon Feb 27, 2012 11:08 am

Is it a coincidence that in A&R circles 'safe' has become a replacement adjective for 'good'?

And that in days of yore, previous generations of A&Rs might well have used something like 'radical' or even 'far out'

Does this, perhaps just hint at an underlying mind-set?
MarkOne
Frequent Poster
Posts: 991
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2007 12:00 am
Location: Bristol, England, Earth, Peruses Gap, Milky Way

Debut Album 'Fantasy Bridge' available now!


Re: What's gone wrong with Popular Music?

Postby Scramble » Mon Feb 27, 2012 11:57 am

I'm not sure that the A&R men would have described Puppet on a String or Herman's Hermits as 'radical'.
Scramble
Frequent Poster
Posts: 2285
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2002 11:00 pm

 


Re: What's gone wrong with Popular Music?

Postby BJG145 » Mon Feb 27, 2012 12:13 pm

Shambolic Charm wrote:I have an increasing sense that there is a decrease of melodic range in mainstream music as time goes on.

Yeah, and thematic range. There's a general lack of imagination. I caught Mr Blue Sky on the radio the other day with its piano concerto outro and thought it was fabulously inventive compared to the typical fodder of the day.
User avatar
BJG145
Frequent Poster
Posts: 2995
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 11:00 pm
Location: Norwich UK

 


Re: What's gone wrong with Popular Music?

Postby Richie Royale » Mon Feb 27, 2012 1:22 pm

Samurai Jack wrote:also, time is an excellent filter: the good stuff sticks around. the rubbish stuff falls by the wayside. i would wager that there was an equal amount of rubbish floating around in the 60s and 70s but has long since been forgotten.



+ 1

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_UK_Singles_Chart_number_ones

This links to each decade and I'm sure it wouldn't take me long to pull some absolute howlers that were the fastest selling singles that week.

Here is a start:

Lonnie Donegan - "My Old Man's a Dustman", 31 March 1960. No 1 for 4 weeks.

Ken Dodd - "Tears" 30 September 1965. No 1 for 5 weeks

Rolf Harris - "Two Little Boys" 20 December 1969. No 1 for 6 weeks.
User avatar
Richie Royale
Jedi Poster
Posts: 4461
Joined: Mon Sep 11, 2006 11:00 pm
Location: Bristol, England.

Re: What's gone wrong with Popular Music?

Postby Howdy Doody Time » Mon Feb 27, 2012 1:30 pm

Agreed. But won't the same be true now? The difference might be that in 40 years time there will be a lot less left after the filter process.

It is true though that there are now and have been recently some great records released, and maybe it's just the volume of new stuff compared with then that seems to be the overall diluting factor.

I still wonder though.
User avatar
Howdy Doody Time
Regular
Posts: 358
Joined: Sun Jan 18, 2009 12:00 am
Location: Huai Yai, Chon Buri, Siam

The only excuse we have for making music in the first place is to make it differently..vis-a-vis our own difference (Glenn Gould)


Re: What's gone wrong with Popular Music?

Postby grab » Mon Feb 27, 2012 1:57 pm

The Beatles are a great example.

Sure they'd played live for a while. But they weren't the only rock'n'roll band in Hamburg or Liverpool. And the music they were writing wasn't exactly top-grade - really all that early stuff is Everly Brothers knockoffs. Can't exactly say there's much melodic or lyrical complexity in "She loves you yeah yeah yeah", "I want to hold your hand" or "Love me do".

What got them success was Brian Epstein. He got them a contract, got them work outside Merseyside, got them TV shows, and sorted out how they should look and act for live gigs. And crucially they were all fresh-faced young lads, fairly attractive by the standards of the day.

Then for later albums you can add George Martin throwing every production trick in the box at their music, and some more tricks he invented himself.

So yeah, let's use the Beatles as an example. A perfect example of how a good manager can sell a pretty-boy group with fairly average songs to the teen audience, and how a good producer can turn those fairly average songs into nicely-packaged pop.
grab
Frequent Poster
Posts: 2393
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2007 11:00 pm
Location: Cambridge, UK

 


Re: What's gone wrong with Popular Music?

Postby Shambolic Charm » Mon Feb 27, 2012 2:18 pm

peppered in amongst their more throw away songs were classics like 'please please me' and 'From me to you' the potential was there to see form their early days. you can't manufacture that kind of talent, you can however nurture it. Which is rarely done these days.

and 'I wanna hold your hand' sounds plenty melodic to me, especially relative to what is in the charts at present.
User avatar
Shambolic Charm
Frequent Poster
Posts: 674
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 11:00 pm

Re: What's gone wrong with Popular Music?

Postby Scramble » Mon Feb 27, 2012 2:31 pm

>A perfect example of how a good manager can sell a pretty-boy group with fairly average songs to the teen audience, and how a good producer can turn those fairly average songs into nicely-packaged pop.

Rubbish. Even the early singles weren't 'fairly average' songs. They might have been basic and limited songs, but they weren't average.

And the songs got better and better. George Martin helped enormously, but he didn't write the songs.
Scramble
Frequent Poster
Posts: 2285
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2002 11:00 pm

 


Re: What's gone wrong with Popular Music?

Postby OneWorld » Mon Feb 27, 2012 3:28 pm

Samurai Jack wrote:also, time is an excellent filter: the good stuff sticks around. the rubbish stuff falls by the wayside. i would wager that there was an equal amount of rubbish floating around in the 60s and 70s but has long since been forgotten.

the only problem with that is if time is going to filter out all the rubbish, what will that leave us with? maybe not so much...


With all due respect, I think you're missing the point though. The issue is about, is today's great music as great as the great music of yesteryear, rather than, is today's rubbish as woeful as that rubbish of yesteryear and I would say yes, the rubbish of yesteryear is as bad as today's.

But I cannot think of any current tunes that will be around as long as the great stuff written long ago that has stood the test of time. Sure enough I was at a 'do' on Saturday just passed, and there were some good bangin dance tunes, the token rap numbers thrown in to keep the moody young lads happy, then everyone leaps to their feet, young and old, and sure enough, it was the old stuff that was the floor filler.

If you do consider the best of today's artists, they are the ones that know their craft very well. It is not to say that good music cannot be written using a computer, it is just the method employed, tends to favour block built music by numbers approach that tends to result in music that is slick but forgettable.

Of course a bad guitar/piano player/whatever is unlikely to produce a good tune, this isn't saying all music made using a computer is bad and all music on a guitar/piano is good, but you tend to find those that have a high degree of musical competence tend to produce more convincing music, whether it is written on computer, guitar or what.

Same as any other trade - we can all go to IKEA and buy a flat-pack kitchen, but it will never be as good as one built by a time served carpenter using top quality materials. They are still playing Mozart, Beethoven and their ilk 100's of years after it was written, will they be doing that with Dappy Duck in a few hundred years time? can't see it somehow. Trends/fashions come and go, but real classy stuff tends to become something of forever.
OneWorld
Frequent Poster
Posts: 2060
Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2009 11:00 pm

Re: What's gone wrong with Popular Music?

Postby James Perrett » Mon Feb 27, 2012 5:23 pm

OneWorld wrote:
But I cannot think of any current tunes that will be around as long as the great stuff written long ago that has stood the test of time.

I remember a mobile disco DJ saying exactly the same thing to me 30 years ago...

Mind you, he did seem to have a particularly poor taste in music.

James.
James Perrett
Moderator
Posts: 5986
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 11:00 pm
Location: The wilds of Hampshire

JRP Music - Audio Mastering and Restoration.
http://www.jrpmusic.co.uk


Re: What's gone wrong with Popular Music?

Postby OneWorld » Mon Feb 27, 2012 6:59 pm

James Perrett wrote:
OneWorld wrote:
But I cannot think of any current tunes that will be around as long as the great stuff written long ago that has stood the test of time.

I remember a mobile disco DJ saying exactly the same thing to me 30 years ago...

Mind you, he did seem to have a particularly poor taste in music.

James.

And where's he now?

And there was the A&R man that famously said the sort of thing! LOL
OneWorld
Frequent Poster
Posts: 2060
Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2009 11:00 pm

Re: What's gone wrong with Popular Music?

Postby HollowAxis » Mon Feb 27, 2012 8:10 pm

It's a fairly simple trick of the brain going on here.
There is no reason for anyone to remember the rubbish that was around a while ago, there was a bunch of it. What would be the point of remembering it be?

Just as you pick and choose what you remember from your past so society does the same thing with music I suppose. There weren't 1000 Sgt. Peppers or Bohemian Rhapsodies, but there were thousands upon thousands of bits of fluff and chart filler. They fall by the wayside and nostaligia takes over. The 'great' songs (Or any other bits of art) were sometimes critically ridiculed in their day, but were publically popular. (I can't think of ANY critics lauding Led Zepplin for instance, but the public purchased their music and went to their shows) (And they were themselves reworking old classics, I think 7 of the 9 songs on their first album were reworked oldies).

This has always and will always be the case.
Many songs and bits of art or film will live on and their lesser brethren will be forgotten.
As will the 'great' songs of the past, and new ones will take their place.
Does anyone regularily listen to music from the early 1900's ? or 20's, 30's or 40's?
Perhaps once every now and again, but not as much as the songs of the era you love or identify with.

That doesn't mean that an 80 or 90 year old hearing those songs won't say 'What happened to music, remember what was around when I was Young'. They were saying that in the 60's when the great songs of that era were born, and they were perfectly right to say it too.
That's what they had the right to think after all.

So subjective. Such a broad topic.
Really nothing can be said to validate any point of view becasue EVERYONE is right about their stance on it. You can try educate people on the history of music and why what is around today is around, becasue of what existed before and influenced the people who create it.
You can do this with art or film or photography or writing or prose.

Beyond that, it's all art and it's all valid... pretty much. (Pretty much)
HollowAxis
Regular
Posts: 139
Joined: Sat Dec 31, 2011 12:00 am
Location: London

Re: What's gone wrong with Popular Music?

Postby alexis » Mon Feb 27, 2012 8:12 pm

grab wrote:The Beatles are a great example.

Sure they'd played live for a while. But they weren't the only rock'n'roll band in Hamburg or Liverpool. And the music they were writing wasn't exactly top-grade - really all that early stuff is Everly Brothers knockoffs. Can't exactly say there's much melodic or lyrical complexity in "She loves you yeah yeah yeah", "I want to hold your hand" or "Love me do".

What got them success was Brian Epstein. He got them a contract, got them work outside Merseyside, got them TV shows, and sorted out how they should look and act for live gigs. And crucially they were all fresh-faced young lads, fairly attractive by the standards of the day.

Then for later albums you can add George Martin throwing every production trick in the box at their music, and some more tricks he invented himself.

So yeah, let's use the Beatles as an example. A perfect example of how a good manager can sell a pretty-boy group with fairly average songs to the teen audience, and how a good producer can turn those fairly average songs into nicely-packaged pop.

Sorry, Mr. Grab, with all respect, I disagree re: your comments on the early Beatles tunes. Even limiting it to the ones you mentioned, they were arguably not average at all, and in any case Mr. Epstein didn't have much if anything to do with the songs themselves, (all IMO!). (Except for "Love Me Do" might be considered average, which only charted at #17 because Brian Epstein is reported to have bought thousands of copies)

She Loves You - besides the dramatic use of the 4th minor, the rhythm changes throughout the song are remarkable.

I Want to Hold Your Hand - complete key modulation to the "IV" (Starting in G, it pivots to C, with the consequent addition of the Dm7/G7 chords), again with quite the rhythm changes.

And after 1000s of hours of live play, they were a VERY tight band, I don't know if it qualifies as "proof", but they were able to record the entire "Please Please Me" album in 19 hours.

Finally, they were pretty good singers, way beyond the Everly Bros by then - obviously, since they were quite adept at three-part harmony!

As far as I can tell, they were musically unaffected by Mr. Epstein. He made John stop wearing toilet seats around his head on stage and things like that, but I think at the time they started making it big (1962-ish) there were no other bands in Liverpool that could in combination sing, perform, and write as well as they could.

PTI (pardon the interruption) please! :)

:headbang: :beamup:
User avatar
alexis
Frequent Poster
Posts: 3512
Joined: Fri Jan 10, 2003 12:00 am
Location: San Antonio, TX USA

Cubase7.5.40 64bit;i5-4570 3.2GHz,16GB RAM;W10 64bit on Samsung SSD840 Pro256GB;Seagte 1TB SATA600 Audio;UR28M;Motif8;UAD2Solo;Jamstix 3.3;BCF2K;TC Helicon VoiceOne;RevoicePro3.2


Re: What's gone wrong with Popular Music?

Postby Guest » Mon Feb 27, 2012 8:47 pm

In a way, I'd say people who get a great sound today are to be commended because they're more likely to be doing it completely on purpose. I mean, digital recorders (at best) merely capture sound faithfully without adding 'colour'. So, colour should be added with careful choice and positioning of mics, then maybe adding analog processes and effects, valve tech, or tape (as an effect), etc. Sometimes I wonder if/which artists of the 60's might have actually preferred cheesy presets and dodgy pedals/amps to those that were then available.
Guest

Re: What's gone wrong with Popular Music?

Postby steve355 » Mon Feb 27, 2012 10:48 pm

I spend 95% of my time on my own, in my bedroom studio, f**ing around with a computer rather than 95% playing and singing with other people, inventing lyrics and melodies, and then 5% in a studio with an expert recording it.
User avatar
steve355
Frequent Poster
Posts: 783
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 12:00 am

Re: What's gone wrong with Popular Music?

Postby Richie Royale » Tue Feb 28, 2012 8:56 am

HollowAxis wrote:It's a fairly simple trick of the brain going on here.
There is no reason for anyone to remember the rubbish that was around a while ago, there was a bunch of it. What would be the point of remembering it be?

Just as you pick and choose what you remember from your past so society does the same thing with music I suppose. There weren't 1000 Sgt. Peppers or Bohemian Rhapsodies, but there were thousands upon thousands of bits of fluff and chart filler. They fall by the wayside and nostaligia takes over. The 'great' songs (Or any other bits of art) were sometimes critically ridiculed in their day, but were publically popular. (I can't think of ANY critics lauding Led Zepplin for instance, but the public purchased their music and went to their shows) (And they were themselves reworking old classics, I think 7 of the 9 songs on their first album were reworked oldies).

This has always and will always be the case.
Many songs and bits of art or film will live on and their lesser brethren will be forgotten.
As will the 'great' songs of the past, and new ones will take their place.
Does anyone regularily listen to music from the early 1900's ? or 20's, 30's or 40's?
Perhaps once every now and again, but not as much as the songs of the era you love or identify with.

That doesn't mean that an 80 or 90 year old hearing those songs won't say 'What happened to music, remember what was around when I was Young'. They were saying that in the 60's when the great songs of that era were born, and they were perfectly right to say it too.
That's what they had the right to think after all.

So subjective. Such a broad topic.
Really nothing can be said to validate any point of view becasue EVERYONE is right about their stance on it. You can try educate people on the history of music and why what is around today is around, becasue of what existed before and influenced the people who create it.
You can do this with art or film or photography or writing or prose.

Beyond that, it's all art and it's all valid... pretty much. (Pretty much)

+1
User avatar
Richie Royale
Jedi Poster
Posts: 4461
Joined: Mon Sep 11, 2006 11:00 pm
Location: Bristol, England.

Re: What's gone wrong with Popular Music?

Postby Gone To Lunch » Tue Feb 28, 2012 9:29 am

steve355 wrote:I spend 95% of my time on my own, in my bedroom studio, f**ing around with a computer rather than 95% playing and singing with other people, inventing lyrics and melodies, and then 5% in a studio with an expert recording it.


Thats it !

In the olden days the route to stardom was via hours of instrumental practice in the bedroom, "'til the fingers bled", with/without hairbrush, then clumsy gigs at youth clubs, school dances, then maybe a local pub, college etc (qua Bryan Adams)

In contrast to buying a DAW and worrying why the plug-ins haven't yielded a hit

And as for the Beatles, my analysis of Lewisohn's chronicles reveals they had done 685 gigs by the time of their first Abbey Rd session in June 62, and another 104 between that and the second one in September, by which time Ringo had replaced Pete. And also that they clocked up 1,160 hours of live work in Hamburg, at least according to their contracted hours
Gone To Lunch
Frequent Poster
Posts: 628
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2004 11:00 pm
Location: London

Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Mixerman and 5 guests