best way to experience music

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
whenhiphopdrovethebigcars said:
The very best way to experience music is when you are playing it. And when you?re listening to what you did in the studio.

Tracks like Shine On can be the same fine when you are not stoned.

Drugs can enhance creativity, but usually don?t have this effect. Most of the times, they make you exaggerate in usage of effects, and sometimes they can really keep you from working. There are so many bands out there you prefer to get stoned instead of working, and thats sad.

In some special moments, though, when everything is perfect, when you would be very creative without drugs anyway, they can stimulate creativity even more. Anyway, I?d prefer smoking on a party where I can shake me booty and not think about creating art.

Word is that drugs are uncool. Sometimes... :sexywink:

Have you ever tried to play stoned? It seems so amazing while you're doing it, then you listen to the tape the next day and realize you played a D chord for 95 minutes :laugh:
 
i still disagree with all of this talk about drugs not making artists more creative. in the book "acid dreams: the complete social history of LSD: the CIA, the sixties and beyond," bob dylan talks about his music before and after he began using LSD. it's quite interesting.
 
I think drugs definitely influence the creativity of artists. And that influence isn't necessarily bad. After all, there's a lot of really great music that we probably wouldn't have if the artsits who made it had never done drugs. But I still think it's a misinterpretation to say drugs make artists MORE creative. And I'd still rather have some great artists around and risk hating them by now than have had them die prematurely as they did.
 
bonosgirl84 said:


spare me the anti-drug :censored:

you know damn well that i am referring to the naturally occuring psychedelic found in several cactus species, most notably, peyote.

Ouch! I was being quite honest. I've heard it's rat poison. Can I please have my head back? You bit it off. :crazy:
 
bonosgirl84 said:


spare me the anti-drug :censored:

you know damn well that i am referring to the naturally occuring psychedelic found in several cactus species, most notably, peyote.

And there are a lot of naturally occuring things that aren't very good for you. Of course, the stuff your talking about isn't exactly rat poison, but just because something's "naturally occuring" doesn't mean it's not harmful.
 
Last edited:
BG84 you should provide the science behind how these drugs make you "more creative" - as in making the creative centers of your brain more developed, if you are going to take up this argument.
 
angeloflarrydom: mescaline is not found in all species of cactus. enjoy.

mr.brau1: forgive me. here's your head back. i even combed your hair for you.

hallelujah here she comes: i never said peyote wasn't harmful.

digi: i am not a scientist. nor did i ever claim to have scientific proof. if every post that was made here required scientific proof to support it's validity, it would be a very silent forum. i am basing all of my statements on my own personal experiences :silent: and statements made by some of the artists i listed before.

"i believe in a long, prolonged, derangement of the senses in order to obtain the unknown" -jim morrison

"we were very fortunate to have a little time in history when LSD was still legal and we were able to experiment with drugs just like we wre doing with our music" -jerry garcia

"LSD opened my eyes" -paul mccartney

"music and herb go together" -bob marley
 
MrBrau1 said:


Have you ever tried to play stoned? It seems so amazing while you're doing it, then you listen to the tape the next day and realize you played a D chord for 95 minutes :laugh:

I know that one pretty well :lol:

On the other hand, a D chord can be played in many different ways... and its a nice chord :D

Anyway, I know and y?all better believe that drugs don?t make a production process more creative. The creativity is there from the start, or it isn?t. There are countless boring hits of the 80s, and artists were on bolivian marching powder such a lot those days.

I agree there are many examples of people tripping and painting Lucy. But on the other hand, take a look at Syd Barrett. Listen to the first LP of the Pink Floyd, and take into account that he was destroyed by tripping out too far.

Or do you think David Bowie would have been less creative without drugs? His music may have sounded different, but less creative - I don?t buy it. Take a look at Prince. He didn?t take much as far as I know, still he is/ was one of the most creative musicians out there. You realize that music itself is a wonderful legal drug.

I?m not anti-drugs at all, I just say it kills productivity if its not controlled use, like a spliff then and there. Remember the countless hours of studio time that were wasted because people were high.

"What u putting in your nose
Is that where all your money goes
The river of addiction flows
U think its hot, but there won?t be no water
When the fire blows
Dig it

Pop Life
Everybody needs a thrill
Pop Life
We all got a space to fill
Pop Life
Everybody can?t be on top
Life it ain?t that funky
Unless its got that Pop"

Prince, Pop Life
 
Last edited:
The quote about imagining all the great artists without their substances was a good one. Yeah, they died...but its like they're remembered as the modern Shakesperean tragic heroes of art, in all its beautiful forms. Good or bad? Pointless debate. Thats just the way it is.
Personally, Im not a druggy. Ive never done anything beyond smoking pot, and if you consider that bad just cause its illegal then you are most likely a boring person whose opinion I couldnt give a rats ass for anyway. As a musician myself, my greatest joy comes in playing music and listening to it. But, on the every-now-and-then, pot opens doors of perception and you can experience music in a totally different, better way.
There is great validity to the argument that it can f*ck you up, and that its dangerous. I dont consider pot to be dangerous. You just gotta be careful, and honest with yourself as well.
 
bonosgirl84 said:



"we were very fortunate to have a little time in history when LSD was still legal and we were able to experiment with drugs just like we wre doing with our music" -jerry garcia


In defense of BG84, I do agree with her that drugs did enhance the creativity of the musicians she mentioned. Regarding the Grateful Dead and Jerry's above quote. Have any of you ever heard of the "Acid Tests"??? The Dead would play for hours upon hours all the while tripping. Some of the music that came out of them was unbelievable!

And stereotype me if you will, but I find that listening to music, particulary something along the vein of the Grateful Dead, while high ABSOLUTELY enhances it.

And for the record I am NOT a druggie, I do not drink alcohol (anymore) and have stopped smoking pot. But from my past experiences I can tell you....going to see a band or going out dancing at a club is way more fun while you are under the influence. This, of course, is just my opinon.

As far as present day I prefer to listen to my music on my headphones. I love to hear every nook and cranny.
 
When I was younger and much more adventurous I used to listen to music stoned, and believed that it was the greatest thing since sliced bread. Now, it did do some funky things to what I was listening to, but what I discovered after sobering up and quit smoking for good, was that a lot of the music I thought was so great was no longer as interesting. Maybe that's a personal opinion, but I've heard it from other people. Interestingly enough, I had a friend who had no interest in pot or the band Phish when I was a pot head. I sobered up, he started smoking, and immediately he became really into Phish while I drifted away from their music. Interesting I think.

I went to one concert stoned, and spent the entire time staring at the lights. I barely remember the music. I find that sad.

I think that drugs has damaged the music business tremendously. We've lost some amazing musicians because of drugs and alcohol. The only thing I think drugs contribute to the music process is that it makes people let down their guard, but I'm a firm believer that this can be done sober.

Substances in small doses are okay (as in, maybe once or twice a year in moderate amounts). But the musician that gets boozed up or stoned before every set, every recording session, every time they write lyrics. I'm guessing that more could be accomplished if they were sober. I think that so many musicians turn to substances because they lack self esteem.

Some one listed all the famous musicians that are dead because of drugs and alcohol. Imagine what they could have been. Personally, I think they burned out too quickly, and if they did last longer and didn't end up doing much, then I guess you could ask: were they really that great?

And just look at all the musicians that have sobered up. Anyone want to argue that Adam was a better basist when he was drunk? As far as I'm concerned, Adam's playing has become much much much much more exciting since he sobered up.
 
Back
Top Bottom