Music [3]

Mrs Figg wrote:The fact that MC Hammer is as about far away from Jane's Addiction as its possible to get.

Huh? Musically, the beat to "U Can't Touch This" is built around a prominent sample from Rick James' "Super Freak", which is one of the more famous funk songs of the 1980s. The sound of Jane's Addiction (which I like, don't get me wrong) is based on a fusion of genres but they have a not-insignificant funk influence themselves. They hardly exist at opposite ends of the spectrum of popular musical genres.

and saying one hip hop album is great doesn't really make me change my opinion.

My point was not even that either of the two albums I named are great (though I think they are), but that they represent a significant diversity in sound beyond the bounds of what is stereotypically considered modern pop.  Yeezus draws on a variety of dance and electronic music (sub)genres but it also incorporates punk and soul and most of its beats are not particularly danceable. To Pimp a Butterfly likewise has an eclectic set of influences though not the same ones. It is most notable for its incorporation of jazz elements, both contemporary and "classic", and with a few exceptions is too erratic (in a good way I think) to work well as a club banger/dance track. And that's to say nothing of the lyrical content.

Also, I kinda felt like this went without saying, but I guess I should affirm that my focusing on two albums as examples is in no way meant to imply that they are the only two innovative modern hip hop albums.

David H wrote:By the 90's and 00's the radio stations were all being bought up by corporate marketing syndicates...

One of the nice things about the Internet and music is that radio play is less of a factor in determining which artists become famous and successful, though it was never necessary (N.W.A. being one of the more famous examples from the '80s of a group that became incredibly successful with almost no radio play).

Now I'll confess I don't even have a clue how an unknown artist goes about getting their first hit, other than that it's almost got to be online.

While success on Soundcloud, Bandcamp, YouTube, or elsewhere online is definitely one possible route to mainstream success, there are still local music scenes based on various genres in most cities, like there has been for a long time, and gaining prominence in such a scene can help an artist come to the attention of labels.

Mrs Figg wrote:I understand that times change and you cant have a mono-culture, but the point is the mainstream music today is bland plastic pop which is evident in the best sellers in the market being bland pop 'stars' like Tayler Swift rather than the Beatles etc etc. the mainstream pop music today, is crap. Britpop is as dead as a Dodo. I haven't 'made a mistake'. its provable.

It's not provable. It's completely subjective.

Taylor Swift is probably the best thing in mainstream pop music at the moment (and is better than any of the pop I remember from the 90s and early 2000s). Her latest hit is a big departure from her typical style, so it'll be interesting to see in what direction she moves.



I'll tell you all what music is really missing: good old-fashioned hardship and suffering.

Beethoven's gradual hearing loss and eventual total deafness; Schubert's syphilis; Schumann's schizophrenia/bipolar disorder; Chopin's illness; Messiaen being in a prisoner of war camp in WWII; Shostakovich living in fear and being creatively stifled under communist rule; Bartok struggling to make it in America and succumbing to illness.

Successful musicians have it way too easy these days.

I think of N.W.A. as 90's but I guess they started earlier. Wasn't their big breakthrough when they got the parental advisory label and made the national evening news though? That's the kind of free advertising that not every young group can expect...

David H wrote:I think of N.W.A. as 90's but I guess they started earlier. Wasn't their big breakthrough when they got the parental advisory label and made the national evening news though? That's the kind of free advertising that not every young group can expect...

N.W.A. was around until 1991 but Ice Cube left the group in 1989 and they never really recovered from that. After Dr. Dre left in '91 the group ceased to exist.

They got a big boost from the fact that the FBI sent a threatening letter to their label in response to "Fuck tha Police", as well as the controversy around them in general. I'm not saying that they're a representative example of how groups became successful in the '80s, just that radio has never been the sole arbiter of mainstream success. But that's much less the case now than it was a couple decades ago.

The Los Angeles Times has a really interesting piece from many years ago about how N.W.A. started to become popular nationwide through channels other than radio even before they were the subject of mainstream controversy (see especially pages seven and eight):

http://articles.latimes.com/2002/apr/14/magazine/tm-37890

On similar lines I remember reading the Byrds knew they had made it when they heard Mr Tambourine Man played four times in a row on the radio while driving

I think the major thing that has changed with communication technology and the internet is that there now are other avenues of exposure. Soundcloud, Myspace and so on. You do not need to go through the traditional record industry structure to get heard, although you might still need someone from that world taking up your case and getting a record produced, released and publisized to become popular.

Interestingly, I heard for instance Chance the Rapper operates without any label affiliation, which shows the internet now allows wide exposure outside the traditional industry structure.

Mrs Figg wrote:


old fart rant #2

That thumbnail...

Eldorion wrote:

Mrs Figg wrote:The fact that MC Hammer is as about far away from Jane's Addiction as its possible to get.

Huh? Musically, the beat to "U Can't Touch This" is built around a prominent sample from Rick James' "Super Freak", which is one of the more famous funk songs of the 1980s. The sound of Jane's Addiction (which I like, don't get me wrong) is based on a fusion of genres but they have a not-insignificant funk influence themselves. They hardly exist at opposite ends of the spectrum of popular musical genres.

and saying one hip hop album is great doesn't really make me change my opinion.

My point was not even that either of the two albums I named are great (though I think they are), but that they represent a significant diversity in sound beyond the bounds of what is stereotypically considered modern pop.  Yeezus draws on a variety of dance and electronic music (sub)genres but it also incorporates punk and soul and most of its beats are not particularly danceable. To Pimp a Butterfly likewise has an eclectic set of influences though not the same ones. It is most notable for its incorporation of jazz elements, both contemporary and "classic", and with a few exceptions is too erratic (in a good way I think) to work well as a club banger/dance track. And that's to say nothing of the lyrical content.

Also, I kinda felt like this went without saying, but I guess I should affirm that my focusing on two albums as examples is in no way meant to imply that they are the only two innovative modern hip hop albums.

 the fact it remains a valid comparison. They are not both hip hop dance tracks.

bungobaggins wrote:

Mrs Figg wrote:I understand that times change and you cant have a mono-culture, but the point is the mainstream music today is bland plastic pop which is evident in the best sellers in the market being bland pop 'stars' like Tayler Swift rather than the Beatles etc etc. the mainstream pop music today, is crap. Britpop is as dead as a Dodo. I haven't 'made a mistake'. its provable.

It's not provable. It's completely subjective.

Taylor Swift is probably the best thing in mainstream pop music at the moment (and is better than any of the pop I remember from the 90s and early 2000s). Her latest hit is a big departure from her typical style, so it'll be interesting to see in what direction she moves.



I'll tell you all what music is really missing: good old-fashioned hardship and suffering.

Beethoven's gradual hearing loss and eventual total deafness; Schubert's syphilis; Schumann's schizophrenia/bipolar disorder; Chopin's illness; Messiaen being in a prisoner of war camp in WWII; Shostakovich living in fear and being creatively stifled under communist rule; Bartok struggling to make it in America and succumbing to illness.

Successful musicians have it way too easy these days.

well if that's the best thing in pop I am glad I was a yoof when mainstream artists were still suffering for their art.

You really do have to watch at least 10 minutes of Figg's video to see where she's coming from.

Mrs Figg wrote:

But I think the rise of internet music has made a huge difference; there's so many creative artists now that can survive off internet groupies.

Lot of crap on radio etc. But then there is Sigrid   




And Ina Wroldsen.



And Astrid S.



...with the theme song for the Who thread.      

I like that second Astrid video.  Visually unique. And the choreography is meticulous - appears to be one long shot - very impressive indeed.

{{{ }}}

I will give you until 1995, and that's being generous.

I see the period from around 1995 (or a bit earlier) to around 2005 as being a vast popular music wasteland. But I think we really are finding our way out of it. I've heard a lot of good music in the last decade. It may not have the range of doo-wop to AC/DC, but it has heart and a keen sense of melody and rhythm. What Taylor Swift does with rhythmic permutations in that sample Bungo posted is fantastic, and it reflects the larger movement (most of her previous stuff I find rather bland). I see plenty of youthful bands in New York doing things that reflect an intellect that was missing around the turn of the millennium. As I said before much of this clearly reflects mining the past, but it's not simple mimicry it's real growth. Hard driving rock may be dead at the moment, but it's not at all forgotten. It's just too recent to be tapped into, it needs to age a bit first.

But yeah, the stuff played on the radio misses much of this.

You would deny the greatest song of all time?

That pretty much sums up the warm gooey bland spot in the heart of the sadly sputtering wasteland. But the bachification certainly elevates it near the sublime.

you pesky hipster kids and your rock and rolling

anyone for tea Doris? ooh me hips!

halfwise wrote:I see the period from around 1995 (or a bit earlier) to around 2005 as being a vast popular music wasteland.  But I think we really are finding our way out of it.  I've heard a lot of good music in the last decade.  It may not have the range of doo-wop to AC/DC, but it has heart and a keen sense of melody and rhythm.

I put together a playlist of songs from 1995 to 2005 that I happen to be personally familiar with and enjoy. Almost all of them were released as singles and they're all from artists who enjoy mainstream success and were for the most part released by major labels or at least indie-oriented subsidiaries thereof. I think they represent a decent range styles of popular music in that period, despite all coming from genres that I listen to. The true range is of course vastly larger (even without including underground stuff).

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsr_D10tzDSwPb1ej4T-ojFZ_W66D7Hev

Not saying I think you'll enjoy all of them of course; the list is based on my subjective taste of course, though most of the picks are pretty "safe". That said, I look back on a year like (for example) 2003 which gave us the blues rock throwback anthem "Seven Nation Army", the instant pop classic "Hey Ya!", an improbable but moving Johnny Cash cover of Nine Inch Nails' "Hurt", and the grimey dystopian sound of "I Luv U" as a fruitful one even though no one genre is for everyone.











NB I wanted to include "99 Problems" by Jay-Z on the YT playlist since that's one of the most famous songs from that period as well as a personal favorite, but I couldn't find a version on YouTube so I went with the "Dirt Off Your Shoulder" video (which also includes part of the track "Interlude") instead.

I couldn't find a specific theme to tie "Paranoid Android" (1997) to but fuck it, it's too good not to post on its own (video is NSFW I guess).



Throw in "Teardrop" (1998) too. Perhaps most famous as the original opening theme music of House.

Including Johnny Cash in a 'post-1995' collection certainly reeks of desperation.

No doubt people growing up in that decade loved these songs, but I think I can safely speak for Figgs and myself that for us those songs largely exemplify the aridity of the period.   Seven Nation Army comes the closest to getting people to cheer and rush the dance floor, but these ain't no "Sweet Home Alabama". It's not until 2009 that we get "Bad Romance", "Hey Soul Sister" and a whole tsunami of other earworms.

halfwise wrote:Including Johnny Cash in a 'post-1995' collection certainly reeks of desperation.

It's a song released in 2003 (as a single; it appeared on the album American IV in 2002), which was a cover of a NIN song originally released in 1995 (album version in 1994). It's also one of Johnny Cash's best songs, and I in no way mean to diminish his previous work by saying this.

It's a great song in any version, I have to agree.