I thought that this article might be of interest, particularly given the frequent "music as art" vs "music as commerce" discussions that abound on these forums. Or perhaps another example of musical snobbery being exposed for what it is
http://xtramsn.co.nz/entertainment/0,,3902-2062973,00.html
enjoy ...
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
Google
Technorati
Here's the Ramones/Ratt article ...
Here's the Ramones/Ratt article mentioned in the story.
The two articles are not so much about musical snobbery as the criteria by which we decide what music is good, what is bad, what is important, what is throwaway.
It's all about context people. It's point of view. It's what you grew up with. It's Mabo. It's the vibe.
[ external link ]
Brilliant reference, Stu. Same old ...
Brilliant reference, Stu. Same old question, really... What Is Art?
Actually, there have been comments made on other threads that have really been annoying me, just about "underground"(=good) vs "mainstream"(=bad) and this article highlights very similar issues. It's an interesting theory that the critics decide what is worthwhile and what isn't, but I agree with Joe in that it isn't, and shouldn't be about musical snobbery.
The problem is that even now, no-one has been able to step forward and say definitely what makes a Good band. Some bands are popular in the same way as McDonald's is popular - you like it, you go there, but you'd never suggest that it's haute cuisine. Obviously popularity isn't necessarily an indicator of quality. However, you can't say that just because a band is popular then it must be crap; this is the mistake that's been bugging me on other threads.
So, what makes a Good band, then? I could write for hours on this topic, but I'm supposed to be working... Shame!
a good band = the members and ...
a good band =
the members and audience enjoying the music created.
That's the necessarily true, though, ...
That's the necessarily true, though, either way. Avril Lavigne's really popular, but I wouldn't exactly call her music Art.
On the other hand, a friend once said that HDU makes him feel upset and angry, and that's the reason he rates them.
C'mon, gimme something to work with... If you're going to be deliberately obtuse, I'll rephrase the question - what makes a musician worthy of being remembered?
worthy of being remembered? its hard ...
worthy of being remembered?
its hard to answer,
it really is all about the music,
im listianing to bach now, before that nirvana both of them are dead and gone yet still remembered for the music they added to the huge melting pot of noise made by humans over the eons,
i guess it comes down to time and if the music is still remembered and listianed to for enjoyment (that includes all other emotion you know how people enjoy being sad angry etc) then its "worthy",
tell you the truth i dont have a clue, all i know is that when i was playing 'orkid music last night i looked up and saw a bunch of people danceing in unison to the rythms that were originaly heard in the back of my soul, and i know they wont so much remember the tunes more the feeling they felt whilest danceing, thats proberly whats worth remembering,
// what makes a musician worthy of ...
// what makes a musician worthy of being remembered?
there are quite a few answers for this sort of question, none of them could be entirely true or false, because in the end it all comes down to the individual person.
thats my opinion anyway :)
OK....so basically what you're saying ...
OK....so basically what you're saying is that it's your opinion that everyone has their own opinion. Sage.
Are we here on this earth to form our ...
Are we here on this earth to form our own individual opinions,
express them thru some medium that pleases our peronality
and attract like minded people to unite under a collective idea?
where have all the flowers gone?
//Are we here on this earth to form our ...
//Are we here on this earth to form our own individual opinions,express them thru some medium that pleases our personality and attract like minded people to unite under a collective idea?
Of course. I just thought having an opinion about people having an opinion is kind of redundant.
Anyhoo, back to the discussion at hand,
//, express them thru some medium that pleases our personality and attract like minded people to unite under a collective idea?
Some people seem to be better than it than others. That's what interests me about the subject. Soooo, why is that?
variety is the spice of life?...
variety is the spice of life?
You know - it's really great having ...
You know - it's really great having that next message down by Big_Stu - every time I come to this thread, he's enthusiastically agreeing with a completely different comment. Try it. It's fantastic.
Yeah, some idiot pushed the wrong ...
Yeah, some idiot pushed the wrong button at the wrong time !!!! It has got so I have forgotten what I was agreeing with in the first place. I'm not reall a yes-man ... though Yes are as fine a bunch of musos as ever you could find.
I wonder if the question is more "what ...
I wonder if the question is more "what is the purpose of music?" rather than "what is art?" or "what makes a good band?"
In fact it music "Art" ?
I have nothing against the idea that music can be used to promote ideas, question the status quo or forment dissent. But for me the primary function of music always has been to entertain in some fashion. When the "caveman" (for want of a better term) first banged a couple of hollow bones together and made a sound I doubt that he thought "now, that is a great way to get my message across." I rather suspect that he thought " Choice Bro ... that sounds way cool. I wonder what will happen is I blow down this tube thing?"
Music has been used to tell stories and entertain folks since time immemorial .... whether solo artists or groups the function has been to entertain first. If the people don't "like" the music they won't listen to the story or the message.
So for me a "good" band is one that entertains me. Their music capture my interest in some way. It may be a catchy riff or a clever line. The performance attracts my attention in some positive way. So I stay to listen, tap my feet and, heaven forbid, embarrass my sons by dancing in public. It is essentially a primal response to the rythym and the beat.
If any music has this "catchiness" at its' core then it will attract the attention of the punters ... whether it be the Overture from Orpheus in Hades (think the "can-can" music) or She Loves You by the Beatles the thing that gets you first is not "the message" but some indefinable quality that catches the ear.
At a higher level music can stimulate a response such that the listener "feels" something. The "music is art" response if you will. Beyond the toe tapping and the boogie fever; a feeling of whatever. In the case a lot of todays music this might be a feeling of anger and rage. Though everyones response will be different and hence the polarisation that occurs over such musical luminaries such as Britney, Limp Biskit and Richard Wagner (of the three examples Wagner is my pick for most polarising ... you either love him or hate him ... no in-between)
And then there is the message ... if the first two responses are not happening then the message is just lost in the noise. And the message can be as simple as "she loves you ... yeah, yeah yeah" or something a bit more radical (Woody Guthrie, Barry McGuire or Zach de la Rocha) but the music has to stimulate at the primal level first for the message to be heard and absorbed.
So a good band for me is one that gets my feet moving or grabs me by the balls and drags me up front to listen to the message ...
exactly!...
exactly!