Spice Girls...Stop

[Chiliwailer]

41 minutes ago, Bassassin said:

Am I correct in assuming that when you say 'tomato juice', that's a polite metaphor on a family-friendly forum?

Not sure, I haven’t been on Disneychat since the Donald Duck scandal...

[Killed_by_Death]

 

I'm not too cool to recognize a well-crafted Pop-Rock winner, my vote goes to:

Steve Kipner David Frank Pamela Sheyne the writers of this gem:

[bubinga5]

My wife says I'm a snob when I turn my nose up to this pop. And she is correct. Its music for people who love it. It makes me shudder to think my sisters kids are dancing around to it and really enjoying it and I were negative towards it.. Every music has its audience.

[Killed_by_Death]

4 minutes ago, bubinga5 said:

Every music has its audience.

exactly, even as melancholy as Nico was, she influence later artists & might even have a hand in proto-Goth:

 

[Rich]

12 hours ago, AndyTravis said:

Did this in a covers band. 
 

that’s all I have to say about that.

We do this in my covers band. Big horns-heavy arrangement. I bloody love it. Guaranteed floor-filler. 

[bubinga5]

8 minutes ago, Killed_by_Death said:

exactly, even as melancholy as Nico was, she influence later artists & might even have a hand in proto-Goth:

 

But.. Can I be harsh and say I enjoyed crashing my car last tuesday as much as I enjoyed that. ?

Edited May 1, 2021 by bubinga5

[Killed_by_Death]

 

That's exactly why I used it, even Nico had a following.

I believe she influenced your own Siouxsie Sioux...

 

[bubinga5]

1 minute ago, Killed_by_Death said:

 

That's exactly why I used it, even Nico had a following.

I believe she influenced your own Siouxsie Sioux...

 

Ahh I see. 

[bubinga5]

Pop isn't what it used to be, but that's a whole other rabbit hole. Vid for reference 😎

 

[Bassassin]

2 hours ago, Chiliwailer said:

Not sure, I haven’t been on Disneychat since the Donald Duck scandal...

I was maybe thinking of 'plum juice'.

[drTStingray]

2 hours ago, bubinga5 said:

Pop isn't what it used to be, but that's a whole other rabbit hole. Vid for reference 😎

 

Nice bass on this - back in the days when it was mixed at a decent volume - none if this ‘bass should be felt but not heard nonsense 😂)!! However I disagree with you - from what I hear on the car radio these days there’s some really nice pop stuff around currently (eg Dua Lipa) - I guess it depends on individual taste.

I was first subjected to the Spice Girls album when my daughter had it - along with En Vogue, All Saints and a string of others (Take That and Backstreet Boys were others). I thought they often had interesting bass parts as well! 
 

Edited May 1, 2021 by drTStingray

[YouMa]

The Spice girls were terrible. There was nothing remotely spicy about them I did quite like dirty spice the ginger one though. Music wise this was the beginning of the end next thing we now people were crediting Gary Barlow as musically talented.

[Crawford13]

9 hours ago, bubinga5 said:

Pop isn't what it used to be, but that's a whole other rabbit hole. Vid for reference 😎

 

Of course it isn't what it used to be, music has to move on and evolve. We can't have the same music year after year. 

Whether you like it or not is subjective. 

The truth is no one persons opinion is anymore valid than anyone else's. 

Including my own opinion so disregard this comment if you feel the need. 

[ubit]

I remember All Saints being on just before them and how they were just this uncoordinated mess, then the Spice Girls followed, perfect choreography.

 

At least All Saints could actually sing.

[EBS_freak]

8 hours ago, YouMa said:

The Spice girls were terrible. There was nothing remotely spicy about them I did quite like dirty spice the ginger one though. Music wise this was the beginning of the end next thing we now people were crediting Gary Barlow as musically talented.

You don’t sustain the album sales that GB has in today’s world if you aren’t musically talented. There’s more than enough people ready to pounce and take you down.

The fact that he was writing a soundtrack that defined a generation kind of says it all.

You may not like him or his music - but his credentials stack up and are underpinned by his success.

[Dad3353]

6 hours ago, Crawford13 said:

Of course it isn't what it used to be, music has to move on and evolve. We can't have the same music year after year...

It's done OK by Schubert and his chums so far. 'Evolve' isn't always 'Good'. We'll see how much Spice Girls stuff is being played in a couple of centuries or so. Schubert and his chums probably will be. 

[Crawford13]

16 minutes ago, Dad3353 said:

It's done OK by Schubert and his chums so far. 'Evolve' isn't always 'Good'. We'll see how much Spice Girls stuff is being played in a couple of centuries or so. Schubert and his chums probably will be. 

Again its still subjective. 

There is a classical music community that keeps the music of 200+ years ago relevant. 

If we had the same sort of communities / Learning institutions etc focusing on pop music, Im sure we would have a different perspective. 

[Dad3353]

3 minutes ago, Crawford13 said:

Again its still subjective. 

There is a classical music community that keeps the music of 200+ years ago relevant. 

If we had the same sort of communities / Learning institutions etc focusing on pop music, Im sure we would have a different perspective. 

Self-defeating, I'd say, if the premise is that 'music has to change'. Music created with that in mind is, by its own yardstick, doomed to a short lifespan, to be replaced by its commercially-driven 'spin of the day'. It's done quite deliberately, and even cynically, with the firm intention of renewing the revenue on a daily basis. Good Music does not have, nor need, this driver. OK, it will always be, by this same token, less mainstream, and with a lower visibility, but, to me, 'Good' can be less subjective than is being implied. The term itself 'Pop' (ie: popular...) gives it, almost automatically, its ephemeral nature, in the commercial culture it's spawned in. Its 'absolute' merit lies solely there, I suggest. 

[Crawford13]

3 minutes ago, Dad3353 said:

Self-defeating, I'd say, if the premise is that 'music has to change'. Music created with that in mind is, by its own yardstick, doomed to a short lifespan, to be replaced by its commercially-driven 'spin of the day'. It's done quite deliberately, and even cynically, with the firm intention of renewing the revenue on a daily basis. Good Music does not have, nor need, this driver. OK, it will always be, by this same token, less mainstream, and with a lower visibility, but, to me, 'Good' can be less subjective than is being implied. The term itself 'Pop' (ie: popular...) gives it, almost automatically, its ephemeral nature, in the commercial culture it's spawned in. Its 'absolute' merit lies solely there, I suggest. 

I understand where you are coming from and agree with you that in general that it’s natural pop music is ephemeral. However I stick to my belief that music does need to change and evolve as we can’t just continue to repackage Bach.

However I will stick to my guns that when describing music / art “good” is entirely subjective.  

 

[Dad3353]

2 hours ago, Crawford13 said:

I understand where you are coming from and agree with you that in general that it’s natural pop music is ephemeral. However I stick to my belief that music does need to change and evolve as we can’t just continue to repackage Bach.

However I will stick to my guns that when describing music / art “good” is entirely subjective.  

 

Yes, I was only using the Classics as an example; there is a powerful catalogue of more contemporary music than that of Bach, up to and including modern day composers, in all genres. Maybe the term 'good' is subjective (and therefore pretty meaningless in these contexts...); could I suggest something with a bit more consistence, such as 'sincere', or 'deep', in opposition to stuff simply churned out for populist reasons..? These, and other, terms would also be subjective, I'm aware, but how, then would you, yourself, distinguish music as 'audible wallpaper' to that with a more profound impact (if, indeed, you would...)..? I see a difference in trashy magazine articles and journalism, holiday beach 'eau-de-rose' novels and literature, 'dog-turd' sculpture and fine statues. I personally don't hold with the 'everything can be art' school (yes, I'm old...), and music, in its broadest sense, is, to me, distinguishable between absolute dross and pure magic. There is an infinite range between, but, in the end, dross is dross; a silk purse is far more likely to come from a silk purse maker than a butcher with a bucket full of pig's ears. I certainly don't give much weight to the 'newness' or originality' in and of itself. New rubbish is rubbish just the same (as is and was old rubbish, and there's a heck of a lot of that, too. Offenbach, anyone..?) 

Edited May 2, 2021 by Dad3353

[Rich]

29 minutes ago, Dad3353 said:

Offenbach, anyone..?

My neighbour's dog does. 

[Crawford13]

53 minutes ago, Dad3353 said:

Yes, I was only using the Classics as an example; there is a powerful catalogue of more contemporary music than that of Bach, up to and including modern day composers, in all genres. Maybe the term 'good' is subjective (and therefore pretty meaningless in these contexts...); could I suggest something with a bit more consistence, such as 'sincere', or 'deep', in opposition to stuff simply churned out for populist reasons..? These, and other, terms would also be subjective, I'm aware, but how, then would you, yourself, distinguish music as 'audible wallpaper' to that with a more profound impact (if, indeed, you would...)..? I see a difference in trashy magazine articles and journalism, holiday beach 'eau-de-rose' novels and literature, 'dog-turd' sculpture and fine statues. I personally don't hold with the 'everything can be art' school (yes, I'm old...), and music, in its broadest sense, is, to me, distinguishable between absolute dross and pure magic. There is an infinite range between, but, in the end, dross is dross; a silk purse is far more likely to come from a silk purse maker than a butcher with a bucket full of pig's ears. I certainly don't give much weight to the 'newness' or originality' in and of itself. New rubbish is rubbish just the same (as is and was old rubbish, and there's a heck of a lot of that, too. Offenbach, anyone..?) 

I understand where you are coming from, however I don't think a piece of music has to have a universally profound impact to be sincere.

Just because pop artists singing songs for a certain target audience doesn't float your boat doesn't mean it can't be considered sincere by that target audience. 

I guess punk & nu metal genres would be a perfect example of this from different generations. Music aimed at the teenagers of their time, and greatly received by their target audience, which still love this genre decades on. 

Pop music just has a different demographic, but it's no less valid. My example here would be the response to the recent passing of Les  from the Bay City Rollers. By no means music that is profound in any way but it clearly meant a lot to many people. 

[BassTractor]

IMHO the phenomenon "spice girls" is one thing, but the actual compositions is something else.
I still think their first album had a few cracking pop songs. Don't remember which ones, and I haven't played it for years, but still.
Their second album OTOH bored me to tears.

[yorks5stringer]

Spice Girls.... Stop.

I read this as a polite request.

[Cato]

Meh.

Spice Girls had great PR.

But All Saints had much better songs.