• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Embracing the changes in the music world

#221
bucephylus said:
Your first paragraph only applies to players who have aspirations to be original artists. If you are doing that, your main objective should be to write really great music and watch your copyrights. But, I actually suspect that less than 1% of all bass players out there fall into this category. At any age group. Which is not to say that there is anything wrong with going that direction.

Most bass players accompany other musicians, and contribute concepts, including harmonic, rhythmic and dynamic improvements to the final product. Been that way for a while (like four centuries) and not going to change soon.

Urging other bass players to burn everything more than ten years old is simply advocating for a lack of awareness. That kind of thinking causes bands like Foghat to cover a Muddy Waters tune in a way that shows they didn’t quite get it. Being young and talented and ambitious sometimes leads to poor decision making. Knowledge is not solely found in the present.

Your second paragraph is somewhat hilariously ironic. Let’s see; 99% of people over the age of 30 are dinosaurs, AND you are espousing open mindedness. Do you ever check what you have written before you post it?

Open mindedness means literally having the humility to learn something you were previously unaware of. Think dead composers efforts are deadsville? Get yourself an upright and go sit in your community orchestra for a while. Think Blues is some stupid dead form? Go get a spot as House bass player at a Blues Open Mic night for a year or two. You can do all those things while checking out and playing new stuff. Awareness is reinforcing.

But, we all roll differently. Perhaps, you already have all the answers. There certainly are artists out there with such prodigious talent, that they command attention from moment one. In all age groups. The rest of us just keep learning and keep getting better. For me, it’s a lifetime pursuit. In some ways I feel sorry for folks who know it all right away; because for me the learning is a primary part of the adventure. The LAST ambition I have is to make some hit record and then have to play the same (possibly great) stuff night after night. YMMV
Click to expand...


My post was about the title of the thread. "Embracing the changes in the music world" In no way am I advocating being ignorant of the past or refusing to study the classics to find out how we got here. Nor am I saying that new music is better than old music or there's nothing valuable to be gained from old music. I'm not telling anyone that what I did is what every single musician should do. It is only advice offered to JUST those who think rock and roll is dead and everything good only exists in the past.

And like I said. You can't really delete all old music from your life. It's out there in the world everywhere you go. I'm just suggesting making a change to a significant portion of the music you expose yourself to and actively seeking out new stuff to replace it with. If you don't want to seek out new stuff, fine. But why are you in this thread? If you seek to embrace something and explore it and learn what makes it tick then iit takes a certain amount of effort and sacrifice. Every hour you spend listening to the comforting music you already know and love (Which appears to be Led Zeppelin for many of us) you could invest in critically listening and analyzing something you don't yet understand or appreciate.

And speaking of hilarious Irony, I like how you explained to me that "Open mindedness means literally having the humility to learn something you were previously unaware of." referencing the exact paragraph where I explained discovering my own narrow mindedness and then taking specific steps to change that about myself.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Honch
#222
ZenG said:
Some people might say that Led Zeppelin was the pinnacle of rock 'n' roll. There are many that would not. So once again taste is a subjective thing.

Anyway rock is just one part of the music picture in terms of comparing everything that's happened from 1950 to today.

Thanks for pointing out it was from 2009. I sort of got the impression you were alluding to it being somewhat "cutting edge" for today.

If you weren't then my mistake. I , as did Nev375, thought it was more of a "70's" clone than anything else.

Anyway it is what it is.

Rock on and enjoy..
Click to expand...

Agreed that rock isn't the big picture. It was more what this thread started on, so I was speaking to that.

Honestly, I don't know if much could be considered "cutting edge" these days, the same as rock bands from the 70's/80's/90's weren't necessarily "cutting edge". It's all a variation/expansion or even homage to what's come before or is currently popular. My feeling is that "new" these days is really about finding a way to incorporate past influences, but do something different with it. For that fact alone, I think it's impossible to claim that nothing good is being done these days, because the sky is the limit to what can be done. There is also a little bit of flavor in there for everyone.

The current innovators (in my opinion), are throwing some past paradigms away or are incorporating genres/ideas that haven't really been paired before. My prime example is a band I really like from Australia, King Gizzard and Lizard Wizard. A 7-piece with two drummers that incorporate acid jazz, prog and psych rock and microtonal instruments in their lineup. It's weird and experimental, but then again, we've also heard weird and experimental done before. Perhaps in all those combinations as well(?) Additionally, like you said, taste is subjective... I think they are rad, my friends don't get it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: knumbskull, Jhengsman, blue4 and 1 other person
#223
P-oddz said:
Agreed that rock isn't the big picture. It was more what this thread started on, so I was speaking to that.

Honestly, I don't know if much could be considered "cutting edge" these days, the same as rock bands from the 70's/80's/90's weren't necessarily "cutting edge". It's all a variation/expansion or even homage to what's come before or is currently popular. My feeling is that "new" these days is really about finding a way to incorporate past influences, but do something different with it. For that fact alone, I think it's impossible to claim that nothing good is being done these days, because the sky is the limit to what can be done. There is also a little bit of flavor in there for everyone.

The current innovators (in my opinion), are throwing some past paradigms away or are incorporating genres/ideas that haven't really been paired before. My prime example is a band I really like from Australia, King Gizzard and Lizard Wizard. A 7-piece with two drummers that incorporate acid jazz, prog and psych rock and microtonal instruments in their lineup. It's weird and experimental, but then again, we've also heard weird and experimental done before. Perhaps in all those combinations as well(?) Additionally, like you said, taste is subjective... I think they are rad, my friends don't get it.
Click to expand...

Right on. I dig old and new stuff. My son recently turned me onto another Australian group Hiatus Kaioyte. I like that they're doing something different yet still playing traditional band instruments (drums, bass, guitar, keys).

Let's face it - with the demise of guitar-based music (when this happens) do you really think that BASS guitar will still be around with the exception of jazz which is already a small fairly niche genre at this point in time and is primarily centered around double-bass, not electric. We can all define what we mean by "guitar-based music", though I think we can agree that it includes rock, metal, alternative, country, punk, etc. However, once it these genres go away, unless they're replaced with similar genres where guitar (and bass) are at the forefront, we'll go the way of the dodo bird (broadly speaking of course, hopefully we won't literally all cease to exist!).
 
#224
Nev375 said:
My post was about the title of the thread. "Embracing the changes in the music world" In no way am I advocating being ignorant of the past or refusing to study the classics to find out how we got here. Nor am I saying that new music is better than old music or there's nothing valuable to be gained from old music. I'm not telling anyone that what I did is what every single musician should do. It is only advice offered to JUST those who think rock and roll is dead and everything good only exists in the past.

And like I said. You can't really delete all old music from your life. It's out there in the world everywhere you go. I'm just suggesting making a change to a significant portion of the music you expose yourself to and actively seeking out new stuff to replace it with. If you don't want to seek out new stuff, fine. But why are you in this thread? If you seek to embrace something and explore it and learn what makes it tick then iit takes a certain amount of effort and sacrifice. Every hour you spend listening to the comforting music you already know and love (Which appears to be Led Zeppelin for many of us) you could invest in critically listening and analyzing something you don't yet understand or appreciate.

And speaking of hilarious Irony, I like how you explained to me that "Open mindedness means literally having the humility to learn something you were previously unaware of." referencing the exact paragraph where I explained discovering my own narrow mindedness and then taking specific steps to change that about myself.
Click to expand...
That’s fine. We probably agree on more than what we disagree about. Certainly agree that part of growing as a player is having the desire to seek out new material and techniques.

Regarding, what I stated as being ironic; I was mainly taking issue with your statement that “99% of players over the age of 30 are dinosaurs;” especially in terms of being open minded. But, if you consider that open minded, we can just agree to disagree. No biggie.

I stated my thoughts a few pages back.
Embracing the changes in the music world
I suppose they tend more towards the pragmatic. In any case, we are always tested by situations that could be better. That’s where the opportunities are.
 
#225
Joe Nerve said:
Your input here is essential!!!!!
Click to expand...

Hi Joe :)

my input is: I played in bla bla bands for bla bla years and today bla bla raaaaaaant :laugh:

I should stop posting nonsens! So...

Last weekend I played at a house party. (my neighbour's daughter' s birthday)
the audience was 16 to 25 years old (young :hyper:)

The drummer was 19 and the guitarist 20 years old, so I was replacing the horn section, keyboards and and and :D
(agewise :laugh:) yes I am in my 50's!

we played Hendrix...(I loved it :D)

Today' s kids still wanna rock, but they don' t care for the "rockstar image thing"!!!!

The drummer, as well as the guitarist, are music students. They think about music first!!!

(they don't come from Seattle and they don' t have a drug problem)

That' s why they are gooood :hyper::hyper::hyper: Is that bad? I don't think so!


I embrace the youth, the world belongs to them!!!!

Times have changed, stay young and rock on!!!

Wise(b)ass
 
  • Like
Reactions: EmptyCup, Jhengsman, blue4 and 3 others
#227
japhy4529 said:
Right on. I dig old and new stuff. My son recently turned me onto another Australian group Hiatus Kaioyte. I like that they're doing something different yet still playing traditional band instruments (drums, bass, guitar, keys).

Let's face it - with the demise of guitar-based music (when this happens) do you really think that BASS guitar will still be around with the exception of jazz which is already a small fairly niche genre at this point in time and is primarily centered around double-bass, not electric. We can all define what we mean by "guitar-based music", though I think we can agree that it includes rock, metal, alternative, country, punk, etc. However, once it these genres go away, unless they're replaced with similar genres where guitar (and bass) are at the forefront, we'll go the way of the dodo bird (broadly speaking of course, hopefully we won't literally all cease to exist!).
Click to expand...

I'll check that band out.
I would disagree a little bit with guitar/bass eventually falling away. I don't ever see a time when guitar/bass doesn't have a place in ANY genre. Even genres currently that you wouldn't associate with live instrumentation incorporate guitar/bass put through pedals or modelers to create brand new sounds. They may change in look and functionality, but I don't believe they will ever disappear.
 
  • Like
Reactions: blue4, CereBassum and japhy4529
#229
P-oddz said:
I would disagree a little bit with guitar/bass eventually falling away
Click to expand...
I agree on that. People have been predicting the demise of live music since the gramophone was invented. But after all is said and done there is nothing like the sound and feel of a live band with real musicians hooking up with crowd in a club or a party or a wedding etc. etc.

And if you want a band, you need instruments, guitar and bass are very flexible, playable, good instruments for a band.

People making music with their iPhones are never going to be getting too many club gigs...

:bassist::bassist::bassist:
 
  • Like
Reactions: rodak, Loring and dxb
#235
EddiePlaysBass said:
But I much prefer a 3,000 peep venue to anything over that number of bodies. Most of the people who were at last weekend's show probably hadn't been out in ages.
Click to expand...

I do think that the push to put gigs on in larger venues (like stadiums), and the death of smaller venues (especially in the UK) has not helped music in general, be it rock, pop, whatever.

I remember seeing big bands in the "local" 3,000 seat theatre on a regular basis, where in the past 20 years or so, acts of that size would only play 10,000 seat auditoriums.

Large capacity venues take away the "intimacy" of seeing a band live IMO. By "intimacy", I mean that the band "connects" with the audience far better. Some of the best gigs I've ever been to have been in smaller venues, where the band works the audience, and can see the audience react to the band. Somewhere like a 3,000 seat venue manages to retain that "intimacy", they're big, but not too big.

Live music (whatever the genre) should return to smaller venues, simply to help the audience "connect" with the bands. IMO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: P-oddz, Oddly and CereBassum
#236
Skybone said:
Live music (whatever the genre) should return to smaller venues, simply to help the audience "connect" with the bands. IMO.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. Clubs have always been the breeding ground for great music - jazz and rock. That's where you can experiment and get down and dirty and connect with an audience.

Now everybody wants to pretend they're doing Woodstock or Beatles at Shea or some such BS - all about $$$ - cashing in fast and then living like a rock star until you run out of money. :vomit:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Skybone
#237
I see a lot of people trying to define "the problem." There is no problem. Plenty of kids play instruments, the lessons and teachers are booked solid. Rock is not dead, it just isn't copying the past. And when they do try to resemble the past, like The Black Keys, the talk is always the same.

It's (sniff sniff) derivative."
"Artist X did it better in 1962."

What defines "rock"? Imagine Dragons are pop rock, the same as the Gin Blossoms were pop rock, the amount of guitars are irrelevant IMO. Kings of Leon are rock, the same as CCR was. It's just different.

There's tons of rock, tons of guitars, tons of bass players out there playing music every bit as good as the stuff from '74. A person just has to get out of the mindset that a rock jockey on FM is going to deliver it up, it's not that way anymore. They'll give you Journey and the daily dose of LZ at 5pm. That's it. AM radio gave way to FM, records gave way to cassette, and now the radio is in the process of giving way to the internet.

I understand that people go with what they know. If someone just likes the radio that's great. But don't assume that the music world or the rock world has just stood still too. Or that it stopped when our kids were born and we got promoted. Underground shows still go on, young people still flock to see the latest bands. Just like their parents did for The Ramones or the Sex Pistols. Our parents had no idea of that culture, yet it went on. My dad still doesn't know that Nirvana or REM existed, does that mean rock was dead? Just because they weren't on 96.3FM, the only station he listened to? Why assume that the kids today don't have the same, just because it's not out for us to see?

Anyway, my .002 on the subject of rock.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jhengsman, hrodbert696, EddiePlaysBass and 1 other person
#240
Josh Gone said:
Worth noting that there an awful lot of young women picking up acoustic guitars these days. There is one young lady in her early 20's where I live that makes at least 1/2 of her living making music. She's got a pretty amazing voice, so that helps, but the city where I live isn't very big. My 17 year old step daughter, also a singer, picked up the guitar, and banjo, and sat in her room with her phone and figured out how to play them. She never asked me for anything despite my near 30 years experience playing music. My 14 year old daughter, very into Panic! at the Disco, sings like a bird, and aspires to learn piano, guitar, and drums. Don't discount the young girls picking up instruments.
Click to expand...

Great point. There was an article recently with a rejoinder to the supposed "death of the guitar" that the lamentation was entirely male-oriented and ignored female players (and also presumed that sales tracked usage, whereas really one good instrument can last a lifetime).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Josh Gone and blue4

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back