More Cookie Cutter Bands...

HG - I think I know where you're coming from. When I get on TB at 2-3 a.m. the local "hip" radio station plays the latest stuff and it's almost all some joke trying to sound like Beelzebub getting a jalapeno enema in a voice 5 registers too low for his singing voice, (IF he actually has one), or some guy trying to show how hip the band is by rapping instead of singing, while the guitar is all slammed, detuned, chords supported by a confused mud of SVT-powered bass and triggered drums. I listen to it because once in a while a band with something to say gets played.

Please take the time to look at this link about "the copycat syndrome ." It doesn't make it any better, but it makes it more understandable.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/cool/interviews/mcchesney.html

 

See there is one thing in that paper I wouldnt disagree with but I would say its impossible. He says "I think if great music comes on, people will respond." Alright thats good, but the problem is it won't happen. The quality musicians aren't able to reach their intended audience with the way the companies work. The Radio stations are controlled by MTV (not literally, but by the necessity to compete) and MTV is controlled by the mega companies. My band plays our own style of music, and the problem lies in, where do they categorize us, in Rock? We play jazz. In Jazz? we play Rock, there is no correct way to determine what all the bands should be placed. So for the sake of ease, they make these cookie cutter bands that people say "Oh, band x is like band y who modeled themselves after band z...." and it just continues on and on. The bands dont <B>improve</B> persay, but they play new stuff which is shoved down my age groups throats (14-20) and that is how they look at music these days, " Oh well Adults will like this music but I dont think teens will 'dig' it, so lets put it on classic Rock stations so it doesnt interfere with our teen station." My band might play a certain type of music but since we dont wear the same clothes as all of the rest of the people in that group, we can't be signed.


Sorry for that, I just feel very adamant about this subject, and very frustrated at my generation, who doesnt think they are being played for fools. I AM THE ONLY ONE WHO KNOWS. I HAVE TO TELL......... THE WORLD!!!!

 

I think there will always be bland music in any era, as there will be good music too.

One thing I see all the time are these grungy guitar bands who all seem to use the same guitar (thats what it sounds like). They just seem to want to turn everything up to 11 and thrash the crap out of their instruments. Either that or they try to be some Soggy Biscuit clone.

I think the key to music is to be yourself, not try and be like another band. Inspiration not imitation I say.

 

But...I LIKE Slipknot...Guess I should leave

OTOH, It never really bugs about cookie cutter bands. I realize that they are sad, weak, uncreative people, who are just bandwagoning, and won't matter in a few years/months/weeks. The time will pass. the Backstreet boys left, NSync is leaving, it's all so impermanent. Like I say. Don't like popular acts? Wait a week. I hate 95% of the newer bands out there, but I realize it's a trend. I only really loath the people, who jump from gene o gene in an attempt to be cool. I know so many people with Korn CDs that thought they were cool once, and now are onto Sum 41. Those are the people I hate. Not bands that steal others acts (as stated above), but people who steal bands acts.

And Hategear. About GWAR...I don't think people get them. The joke's there, people just don't see the joke. On the other hand, they started out as a joke...but have they become the joke, you know, lived in it for so long they forgot that they were kidding? In any event, any band that has a CD called Scumdogs of the Universe is OK in my book...

 

Hehehe.......
What about Take Back The Universe by Creeper Lagoon.

 

I'm not sure this is relevant to this thread, but if your cable company has it, try Digital Cable Radio. For an extra $4.95, you get this insane number of radio stations piped in through your cable. No mindless blather from DJs. No commercials. The different musical types are really specific. There's metal, alternative, progressive; three different kinds of jazz, big bands. I have been turned on to all kinds of bands, non "cookie cutter" artists.

 

It has never been more painfully clear that music as an artform is dead, but music as a business is thriving. That is so sad.
Look at the bands of old, they strove for originality, everyone was experimenting and finding completely new sounds, and the music was treated as art. That concept is dead now. Their are a a couple of small sparks of hope with bands like Radiohead and Pearl Jam, but really there is no life in music any more. Rock is dead. It has become the very thing that it originally rebelled against.
I think there is still hope that music can be brought back from the brink, how much more of this recycled crap can people take? The popularity of a band like Radiohead proves that there are still some of us out here that want originality, good music and good lyrics, so there is still a chance...
Jim

 

Cookie Cutter!
What a great name for a Band.

 

I seem to recall Segovia bitching about the crap music of today... he was talking about the Beatles.

The new music scene of today is electronic music. That's where all of the growth, innovation and genius is going - mostly stuff that people like us will never ever hear. I mean, why choose a staid, boring instrument on which almost everything has been known for five decades when you can buy some cheap (or expensive) electronics and start breaking ground?

Lets face it, if you want to innovate today, you would not pick up a guitar or a bass. I mean, rock music is used in politicians commercials for Pete's sake, we are not exactly talking about the cutting edge.

 

You might as well consider yourself correct and say they are. The massive Viacom, which owns MTV, VH1, and TNN (to mention the music-oriented stations of many they own), also owns Infinity Broadcasting which is comprised of 180+ US radio stations. Once the FTC reversed the laws about the diversification of media giants, all hell broke loose. 90% of the top stations in the major US radio markets are owned by the conglomerates.

In 1983, there were 50 dominant mass media companies. Today, there are 5 and they control 90% of the music sold on the planet. (So, "playing your generation for fools" is a piece of cake). These 5 cut deals all the time. Another of these 5 conglomerates, Vivendi Universal, is the #1 music company in the world with a 22% share of global music sales, (Motown, Decca, Interscope, Geffen/DGC, MCA, Polygram, Universal Records, Rising Tide, Island/Def Jam).

So if you're a player in Vivendi with all of those record labels, what are odds that you're going to cut a backscratching deal with Viacom, who owns the most powerful media to get your artists' videos aired in heavy rotation??? In other words, you play our artists' videos and in return, you can tell us what kind of bands to sign/create to help you stay #1 in TV music video so you can charge your advertisers top dollar.

And they all play ball with each other

 

Okay, I got it registered - kooKiE kuTteR ....thanks big time, Donne!!!!

 

OK, let's discuss a few things.

It's very common in music where a real innovator is too extreme to be massively popular but someone who puts a more "friendly" face on the innovation can reap the rewards.

Don't believe me? Check the bank accounts of the NY Dolls, then the Sex Pistols, then the Clash, then Green Day.

Trends seldom are developed in a vacuum. You can look to almost any major rock music style and easily identify musicians who were working towards the same thing at the same time. The one who hits first gets the glory, the others are dismissed as wannabes.

A classic example is the British blues rock boom of the late 60s, Cream (with Eric Clapton) hit first, then along came Jeff Beck and Led Zeppelin. But Clapton, Beck and Page had all worked in the Yardbirds and Page had recorded with both Clapton and Beck prior to the first Cream LP. In fact, there is arare live recording of the Yardbirds where they were actually performing tunes that ended up on Zeppelin's first LP. So just because Cream broke first didn't make the others copycats.

This sort of behavior in the marketplace happens every time a new trend comes along. In the 50s it was the various rockabillies who followed in Elvis' wake. In the ealry 60s, it was the British Invasion that followed the Beatles' success. In the early 70s it was the rise of Southern rock. In the late 70s, it was punk followed by "new wave". Then hair metal in the 80s, grunge in the 90s, etc.

As trends come and go, some acts survive (not always the innovators!) and adapt to the new market. The Beatles didn't even last 10 years, while the Who and Stones will soon be hitting 40. U2 has lasted 20 years, the Allmans for 30, etc. It won't be until 2011 until we know which of the bands you mentioned will be remembered.

When it comes to "support" that means money. Bands get in the press because they have publicists. Slipknot has a better one than GWAR, I guess Radio and video rotation is also determined by record company clout for the most part. So Slipknot lucked into a better deal than GWAR; they got picked up by a major label who can pour money into them.

Guess what, it's always been like that in rock music.

 

Thats true, but I think music today has really lost its passion. In decades gone, there seemed to be a real sense of competition, everyone wanted to be the best and the most original, and everyone was experimenting and trying new things, now though musicians seem content to wallow and let the cash roll in. They've gotten lazy. when was the last time a band had a great original sound? Radiohead probably, cant think of anyone else since Nirvana a decade ago. Everyone else seems to be content just to rip somebody else off and wait for the money to come in. Like you said, this has always happened in music, but before when a band or musician ripped somebody elses style off, they at least changed it enough to make their own sound. Now look at the likes of Creed, N'Sync, those nu-metal bands etc. They are so blatently ripping off someone elses music and style and they dont even bother trying to at least make it sound a little original, why bother since MTV will market it and sell it no matter how sh*t it is.
Jim

 

to sum up:

THESE FARGIN BASTAGES NEED TO BE STOPPED! QUICKLY AS FREAKING POSSIBLE!

 

". Like you said, this has always happened in music, but before when a band or musician ripped somebody elses style off, they at least changed it enough to make their own sound. Now look at the likes of Creed, N'Sync, those nu-metal bands etc."

I can see where you are coming from but i also dont see creed fitting in that statement at least not lyrically there music may be cookie cutter but there lyrics are where the band shines. The same can be said about Staind have you ever seen thenm perform ? Aaron Lewis looks as if he is about to break down in tears from singing from the heart. And the nu-metal bands are only cookie cutter bands if you discount the likes of Tool, Korn (that should incite some of you ) and some of the other pioneers.

I have to agree with you that i would sooner listen to music of the past while most seemed to have more assion for the music but I also listen to the new music and even if i dont like what i am hearring i try to get some influence out of it another perspective. I am a musician I started with drums and moved to bass i am also looking into learning keyboards and a little guitar so i look everywhere for inspiration... it is only those one trick ponies that only listen to one style of music from one period that will be true cookie cutters

 

Two words that should not be used in the same sentence.

 

Yeah I agree, Creed does have good lyrics. I do like them, 'Human Clay' is a great album, but I think they could have been so much more had they tried to sound original. Their approach to music seems to be to simply do what others have done before, and make it more commercial. As good as they are, I think they will always be remembered as a radio friendly Pearl Jam.
I try to listen to a lot of newer stuff as well but, with a couple of exceptions (Radiohead, PJ), I just dont find it interesting, the music has been done and the lyrics for the most part seem to be just there for something for the singer to sing. The idea of a song being poetry with music seems to be lost on most modern music.
Jim