Is it me or is the current music scene CRAP!

[51m0n]

The seperation between big business media and 'real' music is in stark contrast here IMO.

On the one hand the packaging is everything (that includes videos,hos,bros and $$$$) the music is very much second fiddle (whatever the 'artist' thinks) - its all about product as a whole, sales figures bean counters and ironically has no soul - regardless of the fact so much of it is purported to be soul music.

On the other hand is people like most on this forum, who love music. Not the packaging, although that can be great, not the videos, we cant afford to make videos so much, not the lifestyle, cos we dont make any real money at this stuff. Just the music. Either our own or anyone else's that does it for us.

The two sides of this will never ever meet IMO. They used to be a bit closer, but now they are getting further apart.

[thisnameistaken]

[quote name='jmstone' post='464092' date='Apr 16 2009, 04:34 PM']I probably preferred other less (now) famous bands like Pavement, Field Mice and The Wedding Present..[/quote]

Bless The Wedding Present. I was never a big fan but if it wasn't for them, Cud never would have put any records out, and Cud's old stuff on Imaginary was brilliant.

[spike]

[quote name='MacDaddy' post='463905' date='Apr 16 2009, 01:26 PM']Popular music as we know it today, is a regression in terms of musical evolution. The tonalities, harmonies, rhythmic devices, were all going strong 500 years ago. Popular music, has not progressed music in any way.
To talk about how talented popular musicians are today is almost laughable if you compare them to musicians from the Baroque period.[/quote]


"It's been a long time since Baroque and Roll"

[jmstone]

[quote name='bilbo230763' post='463673' date='Apr 16 2009, 09:40 AM']When I was a young developing player, I could go out and see name bands doing 40 date national tours and each tour would present you with a new support band (or two). There also seemed to be more festivals etc.[/quote]

I guess you are talking about Jazz festivals... Not so sure about those. There are almost too many indie/rock type festivals IMHO. A market trader friend of mine is going to 20 festivals over the summer.. more than 1 a week!

James

[Twigman]

Some observations on todays music 'scene'...

Those of us old enough to remember vinyl records lived through the golden age of DJ tune selection. Every record in your box had its own sleeve, some with a picture, some without. But vinyl records had hundreds of memory tags which helped you remember the tune, from the picture to the type faces used, the finish of the cardboard to the width of the spine. Even the memory of when you bought it, where you bought it, from, why you bought it, what you did to the record after you got it (tore the edge off the sleeve, put your coffee cup on the sleeve) and where you put it in your record box helped you remember it. And if you played it a lot the actual record itself would become lodged in your memory; the weight and colour of the vinyl, the groove pattern, the label, your fingerprints. And, of course, the artist and the title of the track would help as well.
But there were many occasions where you could remember the tune but not remember the artist or title: you had a more complicated memory of the track, but a useable one nonetheless when it came to pulling it out at the right moment in your set. In many respects the artist name and song title weren't critical. But now they are. Nowadays they are often all we have.
What strikes me in this age of downloaded digital music, is how hard it is to remember tracks from just the artist name and track title, especially given the increase in how many tracks you get sent or buy. And this is made more difficult because people are using the same rules for artist names and song titles that they used when records came in cardboard sleeves with unique cover art. Its OK to call yourself Unchallenged Emotion and call your track Monday Morning if you had some fancy logo or photo on the record that made those things come to life. But if all we have to go on is a line of text in iTunes or Beatport, what chance have we got to form some kind of emotional attachment to you or your track? What makes it all the more maddening to me is when there is a very memorable part of the track, maybe even the main hook, that doesn't get used as the track name. "Oh I know that one, its got the girl saying "Save Me" in it." Why isn't it called "Save Me" then? In the good old days it was considered a little crass sometimes to be obvious about your song titles. (Song 2? "Whoo-hooo"?) But these days, you have to be obvious, surely. With so little difference between one downloaded file and another, you have to work even harder to get noticed and be remembered. Things have changed.
So, if I may be so bold I'd like to make a couple of suggestions: feel free to ignore them as I haven't convinced myself I know the full solution to the problem at all.
The first is to think about using your real name as your artist name, if you are a solo act, and not pick some meaningless name from the online artist name generator that I'm sure exists out there that come up with crap like "Unaffected Electricity", "Truncated Toiletries" or "Conjugated Verb". If it is meaningless to you it is certainly meaningless to everyone else, and people tend to forget things that are meaningless. If you don't want to use your real name, come up with something memorable, something that instantly conveys something visual or emotional or both, like, er, Dead Mouse.
And the second thing is to think long and hard about what the track should be called. In almost every example the song file is not your best bet ("Wednesday Doodle") as it will mean a lot to you but nothing to everyone else. I'd say the main hook, or some other signature element ("Pjiano") may give you some good ideas, and certainly if there's a vocal stab, however brief, seriously think about naming the track after that, no matter how late it entered proceedings.
There's nothing new in any of this, by the way. Take a listen to "Footsteps In Snow" by Debussy. I'm sure in this case the song title came before the music, but the point is they are one and the same. It does exactly what it says on the tin. On the other hand I'm sure I've heard Chopin's "Op 15, #3, Lento in G min" but I'm buggered if I can remember how it goes.

[MB1]

[quote name='thisnameistaken' post='464079' date='Apr 16 2009, 04:21 PM']Hmm. Well...

I do agree that fame is something separate. A lack of it wouldn't (and doesn't!) stop me wanting to make music. Money is a similar story - it doesn't necessarily follow that people should give me money for doing it, so I don't mind if I don't get any. I'm more interested in making something and showing it to people and having them tell me it's rubbish. Telling me it's good would be nice too, but you can't have everything.

I think some musicians are of the opinion that they should be globally celebrated purely on the merits of their instrumental prowess. The fact is if you're not an engaging raconteur, or gorgeous, or preferably both, it's probably not going to happen. And that's been the case since the 1950s at least.[/quote]

MB1.
...You do realise how much youve just upset the ..."Gorgeous Raconteurs"... now!
(i've heard worse band names!)

[jmstone]

[quote name='Twigman' post='464133' date='Apr 16 2009, 04:55 PM']Some observations on todays music 'scene'...

Those of us old enough to remember vinyl records lived through the golden age of DJ tune selection. Every record in your box had its own sleeve, some with a picture, some without. But vinyl records had hundreds of memory tags which helped you remember the tune, from the picture to the type faces used, the finish of the cardboard to the width of the spine. Even the memory of when you bought it, where you bought it, from, why you bought it, what you did to the record after you got it (tore the edge off the sleeve, put your coffee cup on the sleeve) and where you put it in your record box helped you remember it. And if you played it a lot the actual record itself would become lodged in your memory; the weight and colour of the vinyl, the groove pattern, the label, your fingerprints. And, of course, the artist and the title of the track would help as well.
But there were many occasions where you could remember the tune but not remember the artist or title: you had a more complicated memory of the track, but a useable one nonetheless when it came to pulling it out at the right moment in your set. In many respects the artist name and song title weren't critical. But now they are. Nowadays they are often all we have.
What strikes me in this age of downloaded digital music, is how hard it is to remember tracks from just the artist name and track title, especially given the increase in how many tracks you get sent or buy. And this is made more difficult because people are using the same rules for artist names and song titles that they used when records came in cardboard sleeves with unique cover art. Its OK to call yourself Unchallenged Emotion and call your track Monday Morning if you had some fancy logo or photo on the record that made those things come to life. But if all we have to go on is a line of text in iTunes or Beatport, what chance have we got to form some kind of emotional attachment to you or your track? What makes it all the more maddening to me is when there is a very memorable part of the track, maybe even the main hook, that doesn't get used as the track name. "Oh I know that one, its got the girl saying "Save Me" in it." Why isn't it called "Save Me" then? In the good old days it was considered a little crass sometimes to be obvious about your song titles. (Song 2? "Whoo-hooo"?) But these days, you have to be obvious, surely. With so little difference between one downloaded file and another, you have to work even harder to get noticed and be remembered. Things have changed.
So, if I may be so bold I'd like to make a couple of suggestions: feel free to ignore them as I haven't convinced myself I know the full solution to the problem at all.
The first is to think about using your real name as your artist name, if you are a solo act, and not pick some meaningless name from the online artist name generator that I'm sure exists out there that come up with crap like "Unaffected Electricity", "Truncated Toiletries" or "Conjugated Verb". If it is meaningless to you it is certainly meaningless to everyone else, and people tend to forget things that are meaningless. If you don't want to use your real name, come up with something memorable, something that instantly conveys something visual or emotional or both, like, er, Dead Mouse.
And the second thing is to think long and hard about what the track should be called. In almost every example the song file is not your best bet ("Wednesday Doodle") as it will mean a lot to you but nothing to everyone else. I'd say the main hook, or some other signature element ("Pjiano") may give you some good ideas, and certainly if there's a vocal stab, however brief, seriously think about naming the track after that, no matter how late it entered proceedings.
There's nothing new in any of this, by the way. Take a listen to "Footsteps In Snow" by Debussy. I'm sure in this case the song title came before the music, but the point is they are one and the same. It does exactly what it says on the tin. On the other hand I'm sure I've heard Chopin's "Op 15, #3, Lento in G min" but I'm buggered if I can remember how it goes.[/quote]

Some great points here. Definitely the explosion of the data age has made the "ownership" of a music recording less tangible, and less personally meaningful (from the point of view of memories of hunting down that elusive album in some second-hand shop in the backstreets of Camden or whatever). That is a loss, but has the reverse benefit of increased accessibility to everything thats out there.

Good point about band and song names too.. I make use of the digital age to find songs though by typing chunks of lyrics into google to find out the band and song name (usually works pretty well)!

James

[OldGit]

[quote name='thisnameistaken' post='463832' date='Apr 16 2009, 12:20 PM']Well, those bands do exist in large enough numbers for me (someone who doesn't listen to any metal at all) to be aware of them, so there must be enough truth to it.


While we're here discussing how shallow the music biz has got, can anyone name a successful band with an ugly singer from any other era? Off the top of my head I've got Thom Yorke, Ian Brown and Tom Hingley. And I'm not sure that the Carpets can be classed as successful anyway.

Oh Ian Anderson, we'll have him too.

Now let's hear the list of the bands with good-looking singers...[/quote]

Mr Loaf may qualify here

[MB1]

[quote name='Twigman' post='464133' date='Apr 16 2009, 04:55 PM']Some observations on todays music 'scene'...

Those of us old enough to remember vinyl records lived through the golden age of DJ tune selection. Every record in your box had its own sleeve, some with a picture, some without. But vinyl records had hundreds of memory tags which helped you remember the tune, from the picture to the type faces used, the finish of the cardboard to the width of the spine. Even the memory of when you bought it, where you bought it, from, why you bought it, what you did to the record after you got it (tore the edge off the sleeve, put your coffee cup on the sleeve) and where you put it in your record box helped you remember it. And if you played it a lot the actual record itself would become lodged in your memory; the weight and colour of the vinyl, the groove pattern, the label, your fingerprints. And, of course, the artist and the title of the track would help as well.
But there were many occasions where you could remember the tune but not remember the artist or title: you had a more complicated memory of the track, but a useable one nonetheless when it came to pulling it out at the right moment in your set. In many respects the artist name and song title weren't critical. But now they are. Nowadays they are often all we have.
What strikes me in this age of downloaded digital music, is how hard it is to remember tracks from just the artist name and track title, especially given the increase in how many tracks you get sent or buy. And this is made more difficult because people are using the same rules for artist names and song titles that they used when records came in cardboard sleeves with unique cover art. Its OK to call yourself Unchallenged Emotion and call your track Monday Morning if you had some fancy logo or photo on the record that made those things come to life. But if all we have to go on is a line of text in iTunes or Beatport, what chance have we got to form some kind of emotional attachment to you or your track? What makes it all the more maddening to me is when there is a very memorable part of the track, maybe even the main hook, that doesn't get used as the track name. "Oh I know that one, its got the girl saying "Save Me" in it." Why isn't it called "Save Me" then? In the good old days it was considered a little crass sometimes to be obvious about your song titles. (Song 2? "Whoo-hooo"?) But these days, you have to be obvious, surely. With so little difference between one downloaded file and another, you have to work even harder to get noticed and be remembered. Things have changed.
So, if I may be so bold I'd like to make a couple of suggestions: feel free to ignore them as I haven't convinced myself I know the full solution to the problem at all.
The first is to think about using your real name as your artist name, if you are a solo act, and not pick some meaningless name from the online artist name generator that I'm sure exists out there that come up with crap like "Unaffected Electricity", "Truncated Toiletries" or "Conjugated Verb". If it is meaningless to you it is certainly meaningless to everyone else, and people tend to forget things that are meaningless. If you don't want to use your real name, come up with something memorable, something that instantly conveys something visual or emotional or both, like, er, Dead Mouse.
And the second thing is to think long and hard about what the track should be called. In almost every example the song file is not your best bet ("Wednesday Doodle") as it will mean a lot to you but nothing to everyone else. I'd say the main hook, or some other signature element ("Pjiano") may give you some good ideas, and certainly if there's a vocal stab, however brief, seriously think about naming the track after that, no matter how late it entered proceedings.
There's nothing new in any of this, by the way. Take a listen to "Footsteps In Snow" by Debussy. I'm sure in this case the song title came before the music, but the point is they are one and the same. It does exactly what it says on the tin. On the other hand I'm sure I've heard Chopin's "Op 15, #3, Lento in G min" but I'm buggered if I can remember how it goes.[/quote]
MB1.
Gerry Dorsey Changed his name to Engleburt Humperdinck (why?) and still went on to fame....one of the biggest hits of the sixties with Release me!.

Edited April 16, 2009 by MB1

[OldGit]

[quote name='Twigman' post='464133' date='Apr 16 2009, 04:55 PM']If you don't want to use your real name, come up with something memorable, something that instantly conveys something visual or emotional or both, like, er, Dead Mouse.[/quote]

[url="http://www.garageband.com/song?%7Cpe1%7CS8LTM0LdsaSgYlG3Zm0"]Too late ...[/url]

Some good points though ..
You forgot the smell of specific vynil albums and their covers

[MB1]

[quote name='OldGit' post='464153' date='Apr 16 2009, 05:14 PM']Mr Loaf may qualify here[/quote]

MB1.
T.A.F.K.A.M.....The Artist Formerly Known As Meat!.

[Twigman]

[quote name='OldGit' post='464176' date='Apr 16 2009, 05:26 PM'][url="http://www.garageband.com/song?%7Cpe1%7CS8LTM0LdsaSgYlG3Zm0"]Too late ...[/url][/quote]

Or even Deadmau5

[url="http://www.deadmau5.com/"]http://www.deadmau5.com/[/url]

[MacDaddy]

[quote name='spike' post='464113' date='Apr 16 2009, 04:43 PM']"It's been a long time since Baroque and Roll"[/quote]

my point precisely!

[LukeFRC]

I think that what you are looking for in 'contemporary' music which was in your music may be the very things the contemporary has rejected deliberately. "rock" as a genre belonged to an age, to revisit it in the same style is artistically pointless.
[about to open a can of worms here, i know you disagree, but get my point!]
In the same way punk as a movement existed in the late seventies and early eighties and then died. It was a product of its time, and with the change in time the music changes. Thats not to say the aesthetic of punk lives on and is there in many bands today (this is in part it's legacy) but punk in and off itself is dead.
When I hear some of the things listed as 'missing' in popular music it sounds like you are harking back to some long lost 'dead' period. We could revitalise the aesthetic but it would be a hollow and empty shell with no soul.

Its like if we were in the early 1900's moaning about the cubists "its not real painting', yet it embodies that era better than a representative picture. To a large extent the medium is the message.

I guess my main response would be if no one is making the things you want to hear then go and make it happen yourself. We are all artists who can create music, and through that create culture. Get off your arse and do something.

[4000]

[quote name='OldGit' post='463652' date='Apr 16 2009, 08:57 AM']Been down this one before (regularly) - fill the venues with drinking punters and your orginal band will get as many gigs as you want.
Alternatively put on yoru own gigs.[/quote]

Er, I think I'm already aware of this (been playing 29 years, gigging the same). Have you seen the scene in the Blackpool area? Covers, cabaret, covers. I have never been interested in playing covers, and unless you're currently in school/college and bring your mates (we're all in our 40s so are well outside whatever "scene" there might be) you've got next to no chance of filling a venue, although the main problem is that most venues who did originals nights aren't doing them anymore, so you don't even get a foot in the door. We have played elsewhere and have gone down great, but round here; crickets.

[4000]

[quote name='Twigman' post='463658' date='Apr 16 2009, 09:13 AM']We have not played in the UK for 20 odd years.

They're still mad for original bands in Italy and Spain and Greece etc and they pay well too.[/quote]

Now you're talking. If I could get a regular gig in Greece I'd never come back (don't quite know what the missus would say to that!).

[OldGit]

[quote name='spike' post='464113' date='Apr 16 2009, 04:43 PM']"It's been a long time since Baroque and Roll"[/quote]

Not long enough in some cases

[4000]

[quote name='BigBeefChief' post='463733' date='Apr 16 2009, 10:31 AM']I think we peaked at Chirpy Chirpy Cheep Cheep.


I think it's an age thing. There are probably some great bands and musicians around today that I would have loved in my teens. Life has turned me into a bitter old cynic who hates everything now.

If you think all modern music is crap, the music aint the problem, YOU are.

In 200 years time people will be having the same conversation and ranting how good bands were in their youth were.[/quote]

Exactly what I was saying.

Edited April 16, 2009 by 4000

[risingson]

You need to be able to look past the stuff on the radio... new music is emergent underground nowadays.

[OldGit]

[quote name='4000' post='464224' date='Apr 16 2009, 05:58 PM']Er, I think I'm already aware of this (been playing 29 years, gigging the same). Have you seen the scene in the Blackpool area? Covers, cabaret, covers. I have never been interested in playing covers, and unless you're currently in school/college and bring your mates (we're all in our 40s so are well outside whatever "scene" there might be) you've got next to no chance of filling a venue, although the main problem is that most venues who did originals nights aren't doing them anymore, so you don't even get a foot in the door. We have played elsewhere and have gone down great, but round here; crickets.[/quote]


Sorry mate, I don't mean to preach to the choir.
So I guess you know what the problem is ....

[The Funk]

[quote name='LukeFRC' post='464220' date='Apr 16 2009, 05:54 PM']When I hear some of the things listed as 'missing' in popular music it sounds like you are harking back to some long lost 'dead' period. We could revitalise the aesthetic but it would be a hollow and empty shell with no soul.[/quote]

That's what people are complaining about. Endless covers of samples of samples of covers of songs that were ok or good. Once all the good ones have been sampled, people start sampling and covering the sh*t songs.

[4000]

[quote name='OldGit' post='464244' date='Apr 16 2009, 06:17 PM']Sorry mate, I don't mean to preach to the choir.
So I guess you know what the problem is ....[/quote]

No worries mate. Just a word of advice; if you're over 18, don't move to Blackpool unless you're happy playing covers and/or shows or are prepared to travel!

[OldGit]

[quote name='4000' post='464314' date='Apr 16 2009, 07:32 PM']No worries mate. Just a word of advice; if you're over 18, don't move to Blackpool unless you're happy playing covers and/or shows or are prepared to travel! [/quote]


How far would you have to go to find a venue that regularly puts on originals gigs?

Can't you tap the market and put your own on regularly?

[RAY AGAINST THE MACHINE]

Haven't read all posts (yet!). Me? In my 40's,was there for NWOBHM from the start.
Skipped last 2 years of school listening 2 my older bros collection of Sabbath,Hawkwind ,Budgie,Zep etc.
Been to 100's of gigs,and adored the thrash phase. Going to gigs was free and easy.

Now, haven't seen anything steamroller along like Metallica(who basically did it on their own terms).
Too many bands seem inconsistent now,and rarely do I buy albums consistently by the same artists like I used to.


Everything seems more manufactured than ever before,with shows such as Pop Idol,Britain's got no talent etc.

I seem to be going to less and less gigs these days. Ater seeing Metallica for the upteemth times at the 2 x02 gigs lateley
my next gigs should be jean michel jarre , Chickenfoot and then Rammstein.

Getting TKTS for anything these days pisses me off!! How a working man( who 's company won't
give internet access to certain sites) is supposed to get tkts is a mystery.

I have to give my friends(graphic designers/art directors) my credit card details/passwords etc.
Or I don't go.
I listen to planet rock,and LBC (can't stand self centered a**holes on mainstrem stations)
I get majority ofstuff from friends who download it etc. I paid a premium years ago
and have no regrds for record companies anymore.

Other than that,the music scene is great today

[leschirons]

[quote name='4000' post='463647' date='Apr 16 2009, 07:45 AM']I once had an online argument with someone about this; his era was was the 60s and he was saying exactly the same thing you are, except in his case nothing lived up to the 60s/70s. As I said at the time, my dad says a similar thing; anything after Count Basie is junk, and that includes the Beatles. Personally I much prefer the 70s to the 80s/90s, because that's when I discovered music. For most people it's all about what era you grew up in and the music that moved you most at that time. The music you liked most as a teenager is normally the music you like most ever after, unless you have a very open mind or are easily bored, or simply weren't into music at all as a teenager. That doesn't mean there isn't good music out there, it just means there might not be music that does it in the same way for you out there. Every decade will have its followers because they'll grow up with the music of that decade, and every decade will have music that you may like and music that you probably won't.

What I find depressing is the complete lack of availability of gigs for originals bands, certainly in our area. We're averaging about a gig a year these days, which is pathetic.[/quote]

Have to agree there. I got into music, late 60's early 70's so it's familiar, and forms a huge part of my musical upbringing however, at nearly 60, I'd still kill someone to get their Foo Fighters or Muse gig tickets. Maybe these bands are too mainstream now to be cool to some people. My point being, in every era, there are great bands making great music. It's all there if you look.

Edited April 16, 2009 by leschirons