Register
Mon Jan 16, 2012 4:42 pm 
The Misfits.
Mon Jan 16, 2012 6:01 pm
I tend to gravitate towards modern minimalist blues/rock (basically the Black Keys and White Stripes and all of their imitators), as well as classic Blues. Also, bizarre Electronica (Dan Deacon comes to mind) and chiptunes.
My favorite album right now is The XX's self titled album. I can't really put my finger on why I like it so much, but it's amazing.
My favorite band ever (ever ever) is the Electric Six. I basically listened just to E6 for about 3 months straight. Evil Cowards (Dick Valentine's other band) is also amazing and completely intolerable to a normal human being.
Also, disco? And some hip hop (MF Doom is AMAZING)...
So yeah, mostly everything honestly, as long as it's not trite pop crap. Even some of that is good.
My favorite album right now is The XX's self titled album. I can't really put my finger on why I like it so much, but it's amazing.
My favorite band ever (ever ever) is the Electric Six. I basically listened just to E6 for about 3 months straight. Evil Cowards (Dick Valentine's other band) is also amazing and completely intolerable to a normal human being.
Also, disco? And some hip hop (MF Doom is AMAZING)...
So yeah, mostly everything honestly, as long as it's not trite pop crap. Even some of that is good.
Tue Jan 17, 2012 1:23 am
Weird Al Yankovic.
Other parody songs.
Music from video games I like.
Classical music; stuff by Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, and the like.
Stuff like this.
Occasionally other stuff, but rarely more than one song per band.
Remeber: God made you special and he loves you very much. Bye!
Other parody songs.
Music from video games I like.
Classical music; stuff by Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, and the like.
Stuff like this.
Occasionally other stuff, but rarely more than one song per band.
Remeber: God made you special and he loves you very much. Bye!
Tue Jan 17, 2012 8:10 am
Whatever JSH doesn't like. 
Wed Jan 18, 2012 3:44 am
Hahaha, some of this is pure awesome. I mean, who doesn't wish they could listen to nothing but Electric Six for SIX ELECTRIC MONTHS STRAIGHT??? (this is not a diss on E6, they are definitely a great band, even if I never listen to them)
Like: Pop with musical and rhythmic twists and kicks (basically, the early to mid Beatles); Pop with a bit of musical maturity without too much pretentiousness (basically, mid to late Beatles); classic R&B, Soul, and Funk (this includes some key figures carrying on the traditions, like Janelle Monae); OLD blues with a sense of humor (R Johnson, Big Bill Broonzy); gospel (Sister Rosetta Tharpe); bizarre extensions of classic jazz/blues ideas (Capt Beefheart, Tom Waits, some Miles Davis); off the wall shit that feels clever, catchy, and/or funny all at the same time (Sparks, Ween, sometimes Emerson Lake and Palmer); singer-songwriters who sound like they've seen many sides of life and don't give a damn what I think (Bob Dylan, Waits again, occasionally John Lennon)
Dislike: Pop without the twists and kicks (umm, lots of examples from all time periods); Pop with obvious pretensions (Boston, Kansas, etc); straight beats forever-and-ever (Trance, a surprising amount of indie rock like Fleet Foxes or Panda Bear); Reggae (Bob Marley, despite having written some moving material, chooses to display it in the most boring genre ever); newer R&B, Rap and Hip-Hop (although I'll admit there are some very clever and heartfelt artists in this underground, it's just not my style); Country & Bluegrass (similar feelings as with Hip-Hop); White-boy/College Soul I guess??? (REM, Dire Straits); 'standard' Jazz/Blues (some Miles Davis, Buddy Guy); singer-songwriters who sound like they're trying to be 'pure' (Simon & Garfunkle)
In short, I usually want to feel like there's something either clever or funny about what I'm listening to. Bizarre can help sometimes. Childish wonder can work too, especially if mixed with the bizarre (Flaming Lips). If I'm going to rely totally on the groove, it almost has to be either black or closely related to the black man's classic contributions to popular western music. Usually that translates to rhythmic stuff: syncopation or upbeats. There's no underlying reason for this; it's just what I like.
I'm sure there's more to this, but that's enough of a post for now, considering I've barely been visiting these sites lately.
I am Srime
Like: Pop with musical and rhythmic twists and kicks (basically, the early to mid Beatles); Pop with a bit of musical maturity without too much pretentiousness (basically, mid to late Beatles); classic R&B, Soul, and Funk (this includes some key figures carrying on the traditions, like Janelle Monae); OLD blues with a sense of humor (R Johnson, Big Bill Broonzy); gospel (Sister Rosetta Tharpe); bizarre extensions of classic jazz/blues ideas (Capt Beefheart, Tom Waits, some Miles Davis); off the wall shit that feels clever, catchy, and/or funny all at the same time (Sparks, Ween, sometimes Emerson Lake and Palmer); singer-songwriters who sound like they've seen many sides of life and don't give a damn what I think (Bob Dylan, Waits again, occasionally John Lennon)
Dislike: Pop without the twists and kicks (umm, lots of examples from all time periods); Pop with obvious pretensions (Boston, Kansas, etc); straight beats forever-and-ever (Trance, a surprising amount of indie rock like Fleet Foxes or Panda Bear); Reggae (Bob Marley, despite having written some moving material, chooses to display it in the most boring genre ever); newer R&B, Rap and Hip-Hop (although I'll admit there are some very clever and heartfelt artists in this underground, it's just not my style); Country & Bluegrass (similar feelings as with Hip-Hop); White-boy/College Soul I guess??? (REM, Dire Straits); 'standard' Jazz/Blues (some Miles Davis, Buddy Guy); singer-songwriters who sound like they're trying to be 'pure' (Simon & Garfunkle)
In short, I usually want to feel like there's something either clever or funny about what I'm listening to. Bizarre can help sometimes. Childish wonder can work too, especially if mixed with the bizarre (Flaming Lips). If I'm going to rely totally on the groove, it almost has to be either black or closely related to the black man's classic contributions to popular western music. Usually that translates to rhythmic stuff: syncopation or upbeats. There's no underlying reason for this; it's just what I like.
I'm sure there's more to this, but that's enough of a post for now, considering I've barely been visiting these sites lately.
I am Srime
Wed Jan 18, 2012 4:08 am
I'm completely horrified by your Simon & Garfunkel assessment.
Wed Jan 18, 2012 3:25 pm
How about this:
Singer-songwriters who sound like they're observing from afar rather than actually having lived close to what they're talking about (Simon & Garfunkle). I mean, honestly, singing Silent Night angelically over a Vietnam War news broadcast??? Did they really think they were saying something here? Contrast with Hendrix's Machine Gun, which is a total mind-slime and makes one realize what life actually feels like sometimes during war. Not just with lyrics, but with sound and music.
I am Srime
Singer-songwriters who sound like they're observing from afar rather than actually having lived close to what they're talking about (Simon & Garfunkle). I mean, honestly, singing Silent Night angelically over a Vietnam War news broadcast??? Did they really think they were saying something here? Contrast with Hendrix's Machine Gun, which is a total mind-slime and makes one realize what life actually feels like sometimes during war. Not just with lyrics, but with sound and music.
I am Srime
Wed Jan 18, 2012 3:35 pm
msw188 wrote:
How about this:
Singer-songwriters who sound like they're observing from afar rather than actually having lived close to what they're talking about (Simon & Garfunkle). I mean, honestly, singing Silent Night angelically over a Vietnam War news broadcast??? Did they really think they were saying something here? Contrast with Hendrix's Machine Gun, which is a total mind-slime and makes one realize what life actually feels like sometimes during war. Not just with lyrics, but with sound and music.
Singer-songwriters who sound like they're observing from afar rather than actually having lived close to what they're talking about (Simon & Garfunkle). I mean, honestly, singing Silent Night angelically over a Vietnam War news broadcast??? Did they really think they were saying something here? Contrast with Hendrix's Machine Gun, which is a total mind-slime and makes one realize what life actually feels like sometimes during war. Not just with lyrics, but with sound and music.
Yes yes yes, this! I completely agree, that kind of stuff annoys the crap out of me. It's like they're trying to elicit an emotion without making any real effort. It's cheesy.
Wed Jan 18, 2012 3:41 pm
I have been reading "Just Kids" by Patti Smith. I had never listened to any of her music before, but now that I feel like I know her, I am really eager to find and listen to her stuff.
Thu Jan 19, 2012 2:46 am
I should make it clear that I don't hate Simon & Garfunkle, I just dislike it when they try to be "serious". Most of their simple pop stuff is great: 59th St Bridge Song, Cecilia (one of my absolute favorites), Baby Driver, Red Rubber Ball (I have a version of them doing this live); I really enjoy all of these songs. But Richard Cory? He Was My Brother? That terrible "I'd rather be a hammer than a nail" song? No thanks.
I am Srime
I am Srime
Thu Jan 19, 2012 10:37 am
I disagree with you both completely. You talk about there being 'no effort', but when you consider the perfection of Paul Simon's voice leading in his compositions, vocal lines and guitar playing, then it puts to shame virtually any other musician in the history of popular music. And, furthermore, it isn't specifically a 'nam broadcast - it's the news. And it raises a very real issue: Christmas is not a happy time for everyone.
On the topic of Hendrix - it's actually hugely obvious. Machine-gun-esque sound effects? It's a gimmick, and not a particularly effective one either. That kind of thing should have finished in the late 1800s, but sadly didn't.
El Condor Pasa is a hugely significant song. It's probably the earliest example of genre fusion in pop music, and foreshadows Graceland.
On the topic of Hendrix - it's actually hugely obvious. Machine-gun-esque sound effects? It's a gimmick, and not a particularly effective one either. That kind of thing should have finished in the late 1800s, but sadly didn't.
El Condor Pasa is a hugely significant song. It's probably the earliest example of genre fusion in pop music, and foreshadows Graceland.
Thu Jan 19, 2012 2:49 pm
have to disagree on that last point. Zappa, velvets, various jazz musicians, the turtles, heck even George Harrison were fusing genres before Paul Simon. as much as I love Simon and Garfunkel, I do think Simon's status as an innovator is vastly overhyped. not just by you, mind. I see this brought up all the time.
to get even more picky, rock music is arguably an amalgamation of various genres anyway, taking great influence from Latin music, so genre fusion was never a big thing to begin with if you ask me.
My website, the home of Motrya:
http://www.jshgaming.com
to get even more picky, rock music is arguably an amalgamation of various genres anyway, taking great influence from Latin music, so genre fusion was never a big thing to begin with if you ask me.
My website, the home of Motrya:
http://www.jshgaming.com
Thu Jan 19, 2012 5:48 pm
ABBA
Thu Jan 19, 2012 6:01 pm
I take what you mean - and he isn't particularly an innovator. But I think specifically in pop, he is. Zappa doesn't fit into any genre comfortably (I, and much of the academy, consider him 'experimental'). I think in principle, you are right about Harrison, but I think you might be wrong with the details. I assume you are talking about Wonderwall Music, from 1967, while El Condor Pasa is from '64.
You are right about rock, but that was more of a 70s thing, I suspect. Early rock (i.e. Rock and Roll) seems to have its roots firmly in the harder Country or Western music of the 50s. I'm not an expert though, so I am genuinely keen to explore this further.
You are right about rock, but that was more of a 70s thing, I suspect. Early rock (i.e. Rock and Roll) seems to have its roots firmly in the harder Country or Western music of the 50s. I'm not an expert though, so I am genuinely keen to explore this further.
Thu Jan 19, 2012 11:47 pm
Okay, first let me say right away that I agree that Simon and Garfunkel do not sound as if they're not putting "effort" into their songs. At least, not to me. Paul Simon is clearly a musical craftsman, and a fairly skilled one at that. He's also somewhat of a lyrical craftsman. The problem is, to me, neither his command of music nor his command of the language makes up for what sounds like an utter lack of connection with what real hardship feels like. It's made worse by his immaculate harmony constructions, to say nothing of Art Garfunkel's strictly controlled vocal. I'd rather taste goat-piss in my cereal than listen to Simon and Garfunkel try to cover a blues song.
Now there are plenty of other artists with the same problems, made worse because they're not as vocally and compositionally talented as Mr. Simon. I chose Simon & Garfunkel as my scapegoats because they are a) well-known and usually well-respected, and b) not afraid to try to write a song with a serious message.
As for the whole innovator thing, it's kind of irrelevant to me. The Nice were quite innovative from progressive rock's standpoint, and even though I enjoy some of their stuff, a good half or so of their catalog is just amateurish and awful.
All that said, I'll try to discuss El Condor Pasa on your terms. Sure, it's a clever mixture of a much more stately Spanish (?) groove as opposed to the more danceable calypso shit John Lennon was doing earlier, or the high tempo stuff Santana would bring to the forefront soon. We mix this with an uplifting pop vocal melody. Okay, fine. My problem is that this clever musical crap doesn't add any emotion to the song; in fact, it doesn't even really feel like it fits. It sounds like the problems that the lyric want to address don't feel real to the writer, so he simply inserts them into a clever melody. Then it doesn't feel real to the singer either, who simply delivers the notes.
Contrast this with, say, Bob Dylan's "Romance in Durango". This was released like a decade later, so it's not nearly as 'innovative'. But it's so much more interesting to listen to, and I flat out love the live version on the Biograph boxset. Here the Spanish-flavored groove sets the tone for a story of "drinking Tequila where our grandfathers stayed". There's an Old World charm to the story, and an Old World charm to the groove. More importantly, the vocal delivery of lines like "Was it me that shot him down in the cantina, was it my hand that held the gun?" SOUND like someone who knows he has done the deed. The deliveries are even better in the live version. Is it fair to compare these two artists and these two songs? Hmm... NOPE! Bob Dylan is a master of reality, so much so that he can bend it to the whims of fiction; Paul Simon is a craftsman.
Okay look, all this is just opinion, obviously. It's art. I'm just defending my statement. As for some of the other comments:
-By "Vietnam War news broadcast" I meant "news broadcast about the Vietnam War". In regards to this and Hendrix, we'll just have to agree to disagree.
-I think a lot of early Rock'n'Roll borrowed a lot from Country and Western, but the stuff that survived and remains with folks in Rock circles (Elvis, Chuck Berry, the Everly Brothers, Ray Charles, etc) drew as much or more from Blues and Gospel traditions as they did from Country and Western. And I'll stand by the claim that one of the reasons that the Beatles are heralded as saving Rock'n'Roll in '63 is because they were the only white dudes around who had the balls to try to sing like black people since Elvis. (obviously not the ONLY ones, but listen to Beach Boys singles, or Simon & Garfunkel, prior to the 'British Invasion' to see what I mean) Then of course there was the fact that they could back this attitude up with the ability to actually pull it all off while writing and singing their own material.
I am Srime
Now there are plenty of other artists with the same problems, made worse because they're not as vocally and compositionally talented as Mr. Simon. I chose Simon & Garfunkel as my scapegoats because they are a) well-known and usually well-respected, and b) not afraid to try to write a song with a serious message.
As for the whole innovator thing, it's kind of irrelevant to me. The Nice were quite innovative from progressive rock's standpoint, and even though I enjoy some of their stuff, a good half or so of their catalog is just amateurish and awful.
All that said, I'll try to discuss El Condor Pasa on your terms. Sure, it's a clever mixture of a much more stately Spanish (?) groove as opposed to the more danceable calypso shit John Lennon was doing earlier, or the high tempo stuff Santana would bring to the forefront soon. We mix this with an uplifting pop vocal melody. Okay, fine. My problem is that this clever musical crap doesn't add any emotion to the song; in fact, it doesn't even really feel like it fits. It sounds like the problems that the lyric want to address don't feel real to the writer, so he simply inserts them into a clever melody. Then it doesn't feel real to the singer either, who simply delivers the notes.
Contrast this with, say, Bob Dylan's "Romance in Durango". This was released like a decade later, so it's not nearly as 'innovative'. But it's so much more interesting to listen to, and I flat out love the live version on the Biograph boxset. Here the Spanish-flavored groove sets the tone for a story of "drinking Tequila where our grandfathers stayed". There's an Old World charm to the story, and an Old World charm to the groove. More importantly, the vocal delivery of lines like "Was it me that shot him down in the cantina, was it my hand that held the gun?" SOUND like someone who knows he has done the deed. The deliveries are even better in the live version. Is it fair to compare these two artists and these two songs? Hmm... NOPE! Bob Dylan is a master of reality, so much so that he can bend it to the whims of fiction; Paul Simon is a craftsman.
Okay look, all this is just opinion, obviously. It's art. I'm just defending my statement. As for some of the other comments:
-By "Vietnam War news broadcast" I meant "news broadcast about the Vietnam War". In regards to this and Hendrix, we'll just have to agree to disagree.
-I think a lot of early Rock'n'Roll borrowed a lot from Country and Western, but the stuff that survived and remains with folks in Rock circles (Elvis, Chuck Berry, the Everly Brothers, Ray Charles, etc) drew as much or more from Blues and Gospel traditions as they did from Country and Western. And I'll stand by the claim that one of the reasons that the Beatles are heralded as saving Rock'n'Roll in '63 is because they were the only white dudes around who had the balls to try to sing like black people since Elvis. (obviously not the ONLY ones, but listen to Beach Boys singles, or Simon & Garfunkel, prior to the 'British Invasion' to see what I mean) Then of course there was the fact that they could back this attitude up with the ability to actually pull it all off while writing and singing their own material.
I am Srime