I appreciate your long-term truculence. Really, it’s impressive.
I am just enjoying too much of real life to be arsed. Pray, continue. We value your freedom of speech at Sotonians.
Pap :
I’m almost certain I’ve explained this before, but there are precisely two types of music.
Dog music is easy to like, jumps up all over you, licks your bollocks and likes to be liked first time.
Cat music says fuck you, I’m doing my own thing, I don’t care if you like me or not. I’'m a fucking killer.
Cat music beats dog music paws down.
Me:
So Prince Charming what happened to Ant Music? Seem to remember that was a big thing back in the day,
2 Likes
…unless you’re a dog lover.
music’s not competitive…it’s not right or wrong…discussing music is the topic that has no answers…just endless opinions.
7 Likes
I don’t agree with that. Music has always been competitive, and while it sometimes competes in ways whcih we might not like, such as rampant commercialsim that blocks the path of worthier artists for mass appeal, we’re now getting to a period where we can genuinely measure the greats.
I may be wrong, but I don’t think many people will be listening to Ed Sheeran in 40 years time, and there’ll be shitloads of sources corroborating that. If Ed falls off the map 40 years hence, is he really that good? The Beatles are still huge.
Just watching ‘greatest guitar riffs’ on BBC 4 (I kid you not) and they just had Paranoid Android - superb stuff and makes you realise how astonishingly talented they are.
2 Likes
I looked up Yolo Swaggings as i had absolutely no idea what it meant and noticed the word, hobbit. The rest fell into place quickly, but feel free to upvote everything i post in perpetuity. I’m sure it will become annoying eventually.
2 Likes
I can take or leave the Beatles.
2 Likes
Why is this? Do you need to nip to the loo?
Can you not last a whole 60 minutes or so?
To me they’re one of the few bands doing innovative music in their sphere that has actually moved on from stuff we’ve been hearing for decades.
For that reason I agree with Tokyo
1 Like
U2 are Simple Minds lite, as you say their earlier work was brilliant, angry and “edgy”, similar with Radiohead, early stuff simply brilliant but the later stuff?
Pretentious shite designed for people who like to say they get it.
To finish the Beatles are a difficult one to judge as they have two distinct periods in the bands life, some good in either and some utter pretentious shite later on.
Oh dear Bazza you plumb - if you use the correct meaning of prententious than All music should be looking to be pretentious - ultimately it’s entertainment, yet many artists seek to place greater importance on the work, to give it a status beyond a tune and higher meaning, than that mere tune… that should be an aspiration for any artist who wants to say something with their music or lyric. … the problem is not those that are pretentious, but Those who don’t even bother and that most never get beyond the aspiration…
Music plays different roles at different times and we connect with it because it triggers and aligns with our emotions both in the melody and the lyric. We might all agree that ‘Hello’ by Lionel Ritchie is insipid arseleak inducing hell but to an 80s teenage girl getting dumped its solace… we listen to happy stuff to be happy or cheer us up or we can listen to lyrics that inspire or educate… or some just want to dance. All good. When you mature Barry, you will find that your musical taste expands - stuff that your teenage self will have loaved becomes acceptable as you discover the merit in it even if you don’t enjoy it- above all as you grow up, you become less instantly dismissive of material and more positive about what it does if not for you then someone else.
One of my fav examples is Britney Spears’ Oops I did it again. When she sings it it’s just a mediocre pop song sung by a pop diva who got kids dancing and old men rubbing their thighs… it was commercial pop stuff that did what it said on the tin… but ultimately most folk never ‘listened’ to it, just heard it… Then for a bit of a laugh, Richard Thompson does a version live … and it’s different thing - tongue in cheek as the lyric is never going to challenge Dylan or Cohen… a great example of context and style on a simple tune… check it out on you tube.
interpretation plays a much bigger role in all this than we often suspect
2 Likes
Taking pop songs and turning them into something else is not new, Kylie Minogue did it on I should be so lucky and was taken far more seriously after that.
When I mature, this is to what I refer to prententious shite, I like loads of different music.
What do you assume I like, if you’re being so bold?
Music shouldn’t be pretentious at all, music tells a story, sets a setting and doesn’t speak down to us.
Once you mature you’ll realise this.
And I think you meant plum not plumb?
Once you mature you’ll realise this, ha ha pretentious or what!
“Pretentious”…the word that tells you more about the critic than it does about the artist.
3 Likes
It’s dog music.
Bounding up on you with all those easy to remember choruses and verses.
Don’t you ever… …suggest otherwise.
2 Likes
http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Radiohead
Just type in radiohead and pretentious springs up! A lot of people think it, I certainly do, strange like many things on here there is a distinct parting with what the outside World thinks and what the contributers on Sotonians think, not a bad thing at all just an observation.
What did Kylie turn “I should be so lucky” into Barry? I just thought it was a shit pop song for 10 year olds. The lyrics are dull as dishwater and the music is just one man and his casio. Educate me.
1 Like
I’d have thought all the music aficionado’s on here would know about it?
Nick Cave said to Minogue she’d have to own the song she was ridiculed for and so on his recommendation spoke the words of I should be so lucky at the poetry Olympics.
It worked or in some way did.
Music aficionado i am not(that’s just a long winded way of saying wanker(thanks)). I’m sure it sounded better without the shit music(casio man must’ve been booked for a wedding that weekend), but that doesn’t stop it being dull crap for 10 year olds(my opinion). Some people fell for it? Really? There’s your pretentious wankers, right there.
1 Like
Back on topic, I really love The Bends and OK Computer.
Haven’t really listened to much of their stuff since. Kudos to them for purposely paddling off in a new direction that they knew could cost them fans. Doesn’t seem to have done them much harm. I’ve never been especially arsed about getting into it. I think the space they vacated created room for Muse, who pretty much took up the mantle of falsetto guitar based music.
I would have loved to have seen them at Glastonbury, but really couldn’t square it with my own principles. As Loach says, they’re an especially political band. They’re going to provide a veneer of legitimacy to a regime that is conducting a brutal occupation which tends to break out into “operations” every few years.
Yorke has not only been truculent about it. He has also attempted to draw false equivalence with playing in the US, which now has Trump. I’d agree that there _is _a debate to be had about whether you play in countries that act as aggressor nations, but that’s not the debate Thom Yorke is proposing.
Radiohead are of course, free to play where they like - just as their fans are free to vote with their feet. They drew the smallest crowds at Glastonbury out of any of the headliners, not only trounced by the Foos and fucking Ed Sheeran, but also dwarfed by the afternoon crowds of Craig fucking David and Corbyn.
Whatever the reason, they’re a band that seems to be losing their relevance.
Weren’t they pretty much the only overtly political band of all the headliners?
Anyway, they’re old timers, like most of us. I really like their latest album but I would not expect it to attract the kids - they’ll have their own thing.