Modern Music Rant

DerHoggz · #1 03-06-2011, 04:04 PM

http://www.timesonline.com/entertain...845456149.html

Favorite quotes:

"Another upset was the win of jazz singer and cellist Esperanza Spalding"

"I have come to the conclusion that the Grammy Awards have clearly lost touch with contemporary popular culture. My being a music fan has left me with an even greater and deeper sense of dismay, so much so that I feel compelled to write this letter,"

If he is such a music fan, how can he not see that Spalding can play circles around Bieber and all the other crap that he would probably have liked to have won.

Selling the most records does not the best musician make. I for one was glad that people with talent were honored when they are largely ignored.

**Pacman** · #2 03-06-2011, 04:48 PM

Music related posts go in Miscellaneous.

Watch the closing door.

bassteban · #3 03-06-2011, 05:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DerHoggz

"...cellist Esperanza Spalding"

Get a rope.

Fassa Albrecht · #4 03-06-2011, 05:09 PM

It's pandering to the crowd. Like a Rhythm magazine poll for best drummer which put Slipknot's drummer in first place, ahead of Neil Peart and Dave Weckl to name a couple.

MIJ-VI · #5 03-06-2011, 05:29 PM

$$$$...

ShredderMaximus · #6 03-06-2011, 06:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fassa Albrecht

It's pandering to the crowd. Like a Rhythm magazine poll for best drummer which put Slipknot's drummer in first place, ahead of Neil Peart and Dave Weckl to name a couple.

Don't get me wrong, I HATE slipknot, but their drummer is a savage.

Deluge Of Sound · #7 03-06-2011, 07:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DerHoggz

"I have come to the conclusion that the Grammy Awards have clearly lost touch with contemporary popular culture.

I'd agree with that. The Beebs certainly has a much larger foothold in contemporary popular culture than Esperanza.

funkygroover694 · #8 03-06-2011, 07:39 PM

this stuff just makes me sad

how can anyone say thats an upset??

with that said, as much as i hated the list of songs for best song, f*** you should have one
atleast it had a decent bassline

DerHoggz · #9 03-06-2011, 07:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deluge Of Sound

I'd agree with that. The Beebs certainly has a much larger foothold in contemporary popular culture than Esperanza.

Definitely, but should that matter? Is it a popularity contest or a judgement of talent? Of course this is more of a "should it be".

prd004 · #10 03-06-2011, 07:57 PM

I lost all respect for the Grammys when Mili Vanili won, haven't watched em since.

99% of modern pop music is absolute garbage. Watch the incredible documentary "Before The Music Dies"

EdHunter · #11 03-07-2011, 04:27 AM

Eh, Maiden got a Grammy, so it can't be all bad...

s_mcsleazy · #12 03-07-2011, 04:42 AM

i honistly couldent care less about this kinda stuff to be honist. i operate on a diffrence wave lenth all together.

the problem is if you judge musicians on there skill then music becomes a endless contest of show offs emmitting great skills BUT unable to actually string a song together (see the genrae of shred guitar as a refrence..... i do like the odd shred song tbh).

if you judge musicians on the songs they play then new music would hardly get recognised since most songs in the charts atm were written by the artists lable.

plus its pointless saying somthing like "geddy lee is better than any bass player ever will be" when quite alot of bass players growing up in this day and age wouldent give a second thought to him because theres no screamo breaks in the songs.

a famous sci fi writer was debating the genrae with some book critics once. one of them shouted at him "you do know 90% of the genre is crap" to wich his reply was "well 90% of everything is crap"

warwick.hoy · #13 03-07-2011, 04:53 AM

The Grammys are ignorable at best. I can't really comment because I don't care to watch, but to me most of the fare that would make it to the Grammy's is safe and uninteresting,...but that's what I would come to expect from a dying dinosaur of an industry. It's all just a regurgitation of cliches.

I will admit that I like cellists/upright bassist and jazz and will likely,...at least give Esparanza Spalding a listen.

Times they are a changing.

EDIT: She's good, and a good bassist...but not my bag. I've never been a fan of vocal jazz but I'm impressed that she can play like that and sing at the same time. That said she probably gives as much of a crap about my opinion as I care that she won a Grammy.

Fassa Albrecht · #14 03-07-2011, 02:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShredderMaximus

Don't get me wrong, I HATE slipknot, but their drummer is a savage.

Problem with reader-based polls is that most people who LISTEN to music simply have no clue about the actual techniques and skills they're listening to, and so, whilst they believe they're voting for the 'best' guitarist/drummer/singer/bassist, they're in reality simply picking someone they like listening to. They're not judging from an objective stance (ability on the instrument) but their own personal choices.

tangentmusic · #15 03-07-2011, 02:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DerHoggz

Definitely, but should that matter? Is it a popularity contest or a judgement of talent? Of course this is more of a "should it be".

It IS a popularity contest.

teleharmonium · #16 03-07-2011, 02:42 PM

The fundamental issue with this is that almost everybody considers themselves a fully qualified music critic. Try finding someone who doesn't consider their opinion on music to be authoritative... hence the rationales as to why music that a person doesn't appreciate, is therefore elitist, out of touch, or otherwise not grounded in their version of reality. Most people cannot admit that they don't "get" something; rather, there must not be anything to get; it has to be some sort of horribly misguided cultural mistake that they are wisely seeing right through.

So any sort of award that isn't exclusively tied to an empirical figure like sales is always a favorite target. People love to complain about things where they are pretty sure most people would agree with them; it's easy, low risk, and almost guaranteed to work as expected. You don't have to reveal anything about yourself in the process and therefore risk being judged. Awards for movies and music are one of those topics.

When the awards or positive reviews go to plastic confections like that kid (who are popular), they get bashed for pandering (and rightly so, IMO). When they skip over the plastic and go for someone with real talent, they are bashed as elitist. Which they are, but there is no good reason for a negative connotation; people who achive things that are hard are an elite; there is nothing objectively wrong with this; it's just that acknowledging it tends to wound the narcissism of jealous non achievers.

teleharmonium · #17 03-07-2011, 02:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fassa Albrecht

Problem with reader-based polls is that most people who LISTEN to music simply have no clue about the actual techniques and skills they're listening to, and so, whilst they believe they're voting for the 'best' guitarist/drummer/singer/bassist, they're in reality simply picking someone they like listening to. They're not judging from an objective stance (ability on the instrument) but their own personal choices.

But nobody has an objective stance. Musicians are just as subjective as non musicians, because of all the influences of them wanting validation for their style or their view of a work ethic or justice in the way attention is paid and not paid.

Musicians have to tell themselves that their work will pay off and wasn't a waste, so they want to see that ethic validated; they are prone to having difficulty accepting that a better song can be simpler or cruder than another more complex song. Music is art and craft; musicians mostly start with the art and work their way toward the craft; along the way they tend to become compromised in their ability to appreciate the art because they have come to emphasize craft. It's the classic ethos of the person who is too close to something, they cannot see the forest for the trees.

Techniques and skills are not necessarily relevant to an audience. Music is about the way it sounds and what it says, not how it is made. So I think that's one area where the audience is right, in their criteria, not that I wouldn't prefer to adjust their criteria in certain ways had I the means.

BigOldHarry · #18 03-07-2011, 02:49 PM

The Grammys have never been about music - at least not in my lifetime. I have to think that Ms. Spauling's award was a pointed repudiation of the corporately manufactured creature that is young Mr. Bieber, likely on the part of a small, vocal minority on the Grammy team (I'm sure SOMEONE up there actually likes music...). The Grammy's are right up there with the rock & roll HOF - - a complete waste of time.

tangentmusic · #19 03-07-2011, 03:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigOldHarry

The Grammys have never been about music - at least not in my lifetime. I have to think that Ms. Spauling's award was a pointed repudiation of the corporately manufactured creature that is young Mr. Bieber, likely on the part of a small, vocal minority on the Grammy team (I'm sure SOMEONE up there actually likes music...). The Grammy's are right up there with the rock & roll HOF - - a complete waste of time.

My sentiments exactly. I have never watched the Grammy's. (well, maybe bits 'n pieces over the years)
The RRHOF is also a joke.