User Tag List

First 23456 Last

Results 31 to 40 of 132

  1. #31
    is indra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    MBTI
    jedi
    Enneagram
    8
    Posts
    1,334

    Default

    Old Man Syndrome

    get off your porches

  2. #32
    Senior Member Habba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    ISTJ
    Enneagram
    1w9
    Posts
    998

    Default

    You obviously have not seen a Tesla Guitar.
    "The present is theirs; the future, for which I have really worked, is mine."
    -Nikola Tesla

  3. #33
    libtard SJW chickpea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 sx/sp
    Posts
    4,964

    Default

    Is this only about rock music?

  4. #34
    The Typing Tabby grey_beard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    1,504

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by highlander View Post
    I have noticed a real decline in music over the last 20 years. There isn't a whole lot that's new. To elaborate a little, think about popular music in the 40s - the big band music was good. It's still good when you listen to it now. Then came the 50s and rock and roll was born. Elvis Presley, Chuck Berry, Buddy Holly. It was different. You hadn't heard stuff like that before. Then came the 60s, the Beatles and music again was reborn in a huge way. Then in the 70s, there was a lot of unique and new stuff. Boston, Kansas, ELO, Pink Floyd. You hadn't heard things like this. It was so different. In the 80s and birth of MTV there was again a lot of new creative stuff. Missing Persons, Depeche Mode, Duran Duran, Madonna, Queen (really started in the 70s), U2, Tears for Fears. There was a new and unique style. Then came the 90s and there was some good music, like the Smashing Pumpkins, No Doubt, Soundgarden and Stone Temple Pilots. They were good but not hugely differentiated. It was something of a blend between stuff from the 70s and 80s almost. It was during the 90s that I started to lose interest because there was nothing really truly new. There was nothing really that innovative. This continued into the 2000s and till now.

    It is like the innovation died. Don't get me wrong. There is good music but nothing truly new or differentiated. If you took most music from 10 years ago and played it on the radio today, it wouldn't sound out of place. I like Lady Gaga for example as well as the next person but she seems like a clone of Madonna.

    What happened? Am I missing it? Who is breaking new ground? Post videos if you have them.
    What I have noticed is that in some undefined period (say late 90's, maybe, I guess Britney Spears was the harbinger of this, although some boy bands might count as well)? Music got replaced by garbage (aside from the disco of the 70s, but that was never music anyway.):
    in particular, instead of talent, one had groups of 1-5 people doing synchronized dancing on stage to catchy hooks: but neither the music, nor the lyrics, had substance: they did not "stick to your ribs" as it were.

    In a related aside, movies seem to have degenerated to "the last 10-15 minutes of a movie is the hero playing cat-and-mouse with the villain in a dark, secluded place with line-of-sight obscured by fog and shadow" or "look at my CGI" or "look at the canned rendering package version of cartoon faces" which, though superficially different, all show a particular emotion with the *same* movement of eyebrows and cheeks: individuality expressed as a unique combination of a limited set of component options, rather than any nuance or individuality *within* an option.

    For music, I have found the band Iona (fusion/Celtic) to be different from the pablum :

    (Everything Changes)


    (Wave After Wave)


    or Glass Hammer, some of their stuff based on Lord of the Rings:

    Nimrodel:


    Sweet Goldberry:


    or from their album Lex Rex:







    And to my mind, there is a certain futile ennui in the attempt to be the next TawdryThrashbody.
    "Love never needs time. But friendship always needs time. More and more and more time, up to long past midnight." -- The Crime of Captain Gahagan

    Please comment on my johari / nohari pages.
    Likes highlander liked this post

  5. #35
    hypersane Hive's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    1,005

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by grey_beard View Post
    What I have noticed is that in some undefined period (say late 90's, maybe, I guess Britney Spears was the harbinger of this, although some boy bands might count as well)? Music got replaced by garbage (aside from the disco of the 70s, but that was never music anyway.):
    in particular, instead of talent, one had groups of 1-5 people doing synchronized dancing on stage to catchy hooks: but neither the music, nor the lyrics, had substance: they did not "stick to your ribs" as it were.
    Yeah, not like in the good old days. Take Elvis, who never relied on something so cheap as sexually suggestive dance moves, and whose lyrical content rivals greats like Whitman and Keats:


    Love me tender,
    Love me sweet,
    Never let me go.
    You have made my life complete,
    And I love you so.

    Love me tender,
    Love me true,
    All my dreams fulfilled.
    For my darlin' I love you,
    And I always will.

    The poetic poignancy of those words makes me fucking weep.

    And that's not even mentioning his musical innovations, like performing extremely formulaic 12 bar blues songs, formerly considered to be black music... Even though he was white! Only extraordinary genius could conceive an idea so bold and groundbreaking.
    I FEEL ALRIGHT
    Likes Chanaynay liked this post

  6. #36
    hypersane Hive's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    1,005

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chickpea View Post
    Is this only about rock music?
    I thought the same. If OP stopped paying attention during the 90's, he missed out on all the hiphop.



    Also triphop acts like Massive Attack, Portishead, DJ Shadow, and the rise of electronic dance music...

    And that's just disregarding rock music. There was also a flourishing indie/alternative scene in the 90's that brought together melodic songwriting, loud distortion and raw production, with bands like Dinosaur Jr., Pixies, Pavement...

    Everything I've mentioned in my post so far have been the entry level acts of their respective genres, too. There's a fuckton of 90's bands that brought new and exciting musical elements to the table. And if you think originality has waned since, you haven't been paying attention.
    I FEEL ALRIGHT
    Likes Chanaynay, chickpea liked this post

  7. #37
    The Typing Tabby grey_beard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    1,504

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hive View Post
    Yeah, not like in the good old days. Take Elvis, who never relied on something so cheap as sexually suggestive dance moves, and whose lyrical content rivals greats like Whitman and Keats:





    The poetic poignancy of those words makes me fucking weep.

    And that's not even mentioning his musical innovations, like performing extremely formulaic 12 bar blues songs, formerly considered to be black music... Even though he was white! Only extraordinary genius could conceive an idea so bold and groundbreaking.
    Elvis is different in that the moves on stage were not choreographed like synchronized swimming; the ballads such as you suggest, were not punctuated by pelvic gyrations (*);
    further, while you are correct that Elvis borrowed from black music, he was able to make it his own, in a way that hadn't been done before. (The Rolling Stones were mere thieves by comparison...)
    Further, outside of lounge lizards, there is only one Elvis: many imitators, but not a bunch of contemporary, indistinguishable practitioners of the same style.


    (*) calling to mind the classic piece by Peter Schickele / PDQ Bach, of a song from a "demo" of "Elvis's younger brother, Enis."
    ("Man, if my parents named me Enis, I'd change my name.
    "What's the difference, he didn't mind. At least not until they started calling his brother 'Elvis the Pelvis.' ")

    " 'Enis' Presley sings 'Love Me' " :
    "Love never needs time. But friendship always needs time. More and more and more time, up to long past midnight." -- The Crime of Captain Gahagan

    Please comment on my johari / nohari pages.

  8. #38
    morose bourgeoisie
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Posts
    3,860

    Default

    You cannot anticipate change in music (not even you so-called Ni-doms! Yet more proof that Ni doesn't exist), because if you could, you would have already done so.

    Rest assured, it will take an unprecedented form, and you will probably not like it, just as your grandparents' generation thought Elvis was too sexual. So we're all Luddites, and passive receivers in this sense.

  9. #39
    hypersane Hive's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    1,005

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by grey_beard View Post
    Elvis is different in that the moves on stage were not choreographed like synchronized swimming;
    Are you saying the choreographed dancing is somehow below spontaneous dancing? Is it only there to fill the void Britney Spears' music and lyrics are leaving? Because Elvis' dancing was a huge part of his appeal as a performer, too.

    the ballads such as you suggest, were not punctuated by pelvic gyrations (*);
    What I suggested was that his lyrics are devoid of substance.

    further, while you are correct that Elvis borrowed from black music, he was able to make it his own, in a way that hadn't been done before. (The Rolling Stones were mere thieves by comparison...)
    The Rolling Stones wrote their own songs. Elvis didn't. What he did was making black music digestible for the white mainstream, by virtue of being a white performer of black music. Any charismatic singer could've done what he did.


    My point is that creativity or substance were never parts of the formula for popular music. As it's written with potential for mass market appeal in mind, it caters to the lowest common denominators. Which are usually love/sex and catchy, simple tunes. That formula hasn't changed since the birth of popular music, and it's not likely that it will, either.
    I FEEL ALRIGHT
    Likes Nicodemus liked this post

  10. #40
    untitled Chanaynay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx/so
    Posts
    5,151

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hive View Post
    The Rolling Stones wrote their own songs. Elvis didn't. What he did was making black music digestible for the white mainstream, by virtue of being white performer of black music.
    (eminem, macklemore, iggy azalea)

    My point is that creativity or substance were never parts of the formula for popular music. As it's written with potential for mass market appeal in mind, it caters to the lowest common denominators. Which are usually love/sex and catchy, simple tunes. That formula hasn't changed since the birth of popular music, and it's not likely that it will, either.
    also a good point
    7w6 - 2w3 - 8w7 sx/so


Similar Threads

  1. Rock Music is Finally Dead
    By Mal12345 in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 109
    Last Post: 11-29-2014, 01:21 AM
  2. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 11-09-2013, 11:07 AM
  3. Is hard rock music completely dead in our day and age?
    By Typh0n in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 04-24-2013, 11:45 PM
  4. A Paradigm Shift or "Genius is Dead"
    By Eldanen in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 12-11-2008, 12:16 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO