Hey, I didn't mean to offend or anything, we were only scratching the surface of a very interesting topic, and expressing stuff in these little comment boxes has rather huge limitations. You and I could go back and forth on music for quite a while. We could pick up the conversation here or on one of my blogs. In a friendly way. I'll say this about Elvis. With Elvis you have the mix of sublime (the voice) and painful (the songs, the band) that is exactly why I enjoy it. Music that makes you squirm in your chair.
"expressing stuff in these little comment boxes has rather huge limitations" fun quote
i guess i got a little fired up about elvis. i do like him. but some rap songs make me squirm in my chair a bit more than elvis.
it's nice to argue about music with someone who doesn't blow up at me... like some of my friends. "RAP SUCKS! YOU'RE AN IDIOT! MY MUSIC IS SO MUCH BETTER".
maybe if you listened to a larger spectrum of rap music, you'd see what i mean about it being more musical than most people think.
I really try to have an open mind about music. You've been round to my sites, probably checked out the Plum Flower site too. I pull in influences from all over to do my shit, from classical to foreign music and all the old stuff. Most of the new music I hear is actually foreign. People like Rachid Taha and Natachia Atlas. I think of Natachia as foreign even though I think she lives in New York. Most of what I was trying to get at, in expressing the difference between today's music and that of the past, is the recording technology. The Rolling Stones for example, would have had access to the best equipment by 1974, yet what I, or anyone, can do with a digital 8-track today is far cleaner. The charm of the old recordings is the distortion. Bad microphones. Stoned engineers probably account for 'It's only Rock 'n' Roll' sounding so horseshit.
i think that artists who use nice equipment can sound just as good as artists who don't. if the song is good, it doesn't matter what mic they used. that's my opinion.
Yeah, sometimes with older recordings I can't get past the bad sound. Or when the only copy of something is a crusty 78. Some of that stuff is really hard to listen to. I just come from the frame of mind that the new stuff is overly slick and clean. They edit out the mistakes, re-take and re-take untill they've got perfect performances, it sounds soul-less to me. I get more out of a band that only has a week in the studio, or a couple of days to do it all. That's just me.
Eminem (who i dislike very much) only records once. it's his signature thing. you can tell because he'll make mistakes a lot and forget the words and stuff.
but yeah, that's only one rapper and i don't like him so it's not a very good example.
7 Comments:
Hey, I didn't mean to offend or anything, we were only scratching the surface of a very interesting topic, and expressing stuff in these little comment boxes has rather huge limitations. You and I could go back and forth on music for quite a while. We could pick up the conversation here or on one of my blogs. In a friendly way. I'll say this about Elvis.
With Elvis you have the mix of sublime (the voice) and painful (the songs, the band) that is exactly why I enjoy it. Music that makes you squirm in your chair.
"expressing stuff in these little comment boxes has rather huge limitations" fun quote
i guess i got a little fired up about elvis. i do like him. but some rap songs make me squirm in my chair a bit more than elvis.
it's nice to argue about music with someone who doesn't blow up at me... like some of my friends. "RAP SUCKS! YOU'RE AN IDIOT! MY MUSIC IS SO MUCH BETTER".
maybe if you listened to a larger spectrum of rap music, you'd see what i mean about it being more musical than most people think.
you are both welcome for my thought inducing kickass ninja post.
I really try to have an open mind about music. You've been round to my sites, probably checked out the Plum Flower site too. I pull in influences from all over to do my shit, from classical to foreign music and all the old stuff. Most of the new music I hear is actually foreign. People like Rachid Taha and Natachia Atlas. I think of Natachia as foreign even though I think she lives in New York.
Most of what I was trying to get at, in expressing the difference between today's music and that of the past, is the recording technology.
The Rolling Stones for example, would have had access to the best equipment by 1974, yet what I, or anyone, can do with a digital 8-track today is far cleaner. The charm of the old recordings is the distortion. Bad microphones.
Stoned engineers probably account for 'It's only Rock 'n' Roll' sounding so horseshit.
i think that artists who use nice equipment can sound just as good as artists who don't. if the song is good, it doesn't matter what mic they used. that's my opinion.
Yeah, sometimes with older recordings I can't get past the bad sound. Or when the only copy of something is a crusty 78. Some of that stuff is really hard to listen to.
I just come from the frame of mind that the new stuff is overly slick and clean. They edit out the mistakes, re-take and re-take untill they've got perfect performances, it sounds soul-less to me.
I get more out of a band that only has a week in the studio, or a couple of days to do it all.
That's just me.
Eminem (who i dislike very much) only records once. it's his signature thing. you can tell because he'll make mistakes a lot and forget the words and stuff.
but yeah, that's only one rapper and i don't like him so it's not a very good example.
Post a Comment
<< Home