Interference Random Music Talk Pt XVII-Lance's Mom Ed.-Jizz the Bang and the Splatter

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Sorry to bring up Wild Nothing again (maybe I should just make a thread, are there enough fans?), but they have a new EP called Golden Haze coming out this fall. Apparently they're opening for Stars this fall as well.
 
u2popmofo said:
Sorry to bring up Wild Nothing again (maybe I should just make a thread, are there enough fans?)
Click to expand...

Do it. There's more than a few of us, if I'm remembering correctly.


To continue the Teen Daze talk, here's a remix they did of a Local Natives track, "Wide Eyes," that's alright:

YouTube - Local Natives - Wide Eyes (Teen Daze Remix)

A better remix of Washed Out's "New Theory":

YouTube - Washed Out - New Theory (Teen Daze Remix)

And, from their EP, what's probably my favorite song, for now, "Gone for the Summer," or most of it...the only copy on teh Youtubz cuts off a minute of it(?):

YouTube - Teen Daze - Gone For The Summer (Part Two)
 
Interesting article by Neil McCormick in the Telegraph, where he discusses McGuiness's recent GQ article about illegal downloading. It's here for anyone who's interested: U2's manager: how to save the music industry – Telegraph Blogs

I'm quoting this part, discussing the current state of things, and possible trends, because it caught my interest.

We live in the age of the amateur. Music (like all forms of artistic self expression) is an innate human talent, and the internet (along with the cheap and easy recording technology provided by computers) has unleashed a tsunami of self-expression. In human history, there has never been more music made by more people (and made available to be heard) than there is right now, even if few can make a living out of it. But in all this abundance of music, where are the geniuses to rival the all time greats? Is music getting more interesting? Or just more … everything? Do we really need all this music?

Maybe music will be something people do for a while and then move on, a Myspace site and YouTube video being the 21st century equivalent of being in a band at college. For people who make music just to have fun making music, times have arguably never been better. As the economic benefits of the music business shrink, there’s a good chance that ever fewer dilettantes will get involved for that most 20th century of motivations, “fame and fortune.” And as it gets harder and harder to make a living, only the truly vocational will persist. With this, the talent base may shrink but the greatest (or at least most driven) talents should still, like the cream, rise to the top. Maybe the future of music will be a huge field of free amateur music and a much smaller but genuinely exceptional base of professional musicians.

Such an outcome would probably not be particularly appealing to most people involved in the music business today. But the survival of the mass market music business is not a given. The internet is changing everything. I have a lingering suspicion that the music industry’s future shape will be dictated by technological developments and social and economic changes we can’t even foresee at the moment. There is only one thing of which I think we can be certain. There may not always be a music business. But there will always be music.
Click to expand...

I agree so, so much with the first paragraph. It seems to me that there's an overwhelming amount of mediocrity out there right now - there's a bland, boring sameness to so much of the indie music that's available, and anything that is actually good just gets lost in the mix, and rarely gets a chance to rise to the proverbial top.

Meh, I don't know. I'm quite disillusioned with the state of new music at the moment, and maybe it's just gratifying to find someone who seems to agree with me.
 
There's always been a lot of shitty music surrounding the good stuff. I don't know that amateurs being able together their stuff out there easier now means that things are worse.

It's better than the fucking 80's, that's for sure.
 
u2popmofo said:
Sorry to bring up Wild Nothing again (maybe I should just make a thread, are there enough fans?), but they have a new EP called Golden Haze coming out this fall. Apparently they're opening for Stars this fall as well.
Click to expand...

1) I think a thread would get traffic

2) Fuck yeah

3) Holy shit, best two-fer ever. Well at least for 2010. Dear God, I love both of those band's albums from this year.
 
VintagePunk said:
I agree so, so much with the first paragraph. It seems to me that there's an overwhelming amount of mediocrity out there right now - there's a bland, boring sameness to so much of the indie music that's available, and anything that is actually good just gets lost in the mix, and rarely gets a chance to rise to the proverbial top.

Meh, I don't know. I'm quite disillusioned with the state of new music at the moment, and maybe it's just gratifying to find someone who seems to agree with me.
Click to expand...

I love this quote from the excerpt:

"The internet is changing everything. I have a lingering suspicion that the music industry’s future shape will be dictated by technological developments and social and economic changes we can’t even foresee at the moment."

What an incredibly obvious comment. That should already have been apparent in 2000, no less 2010.

In any case, I remember reading an interview with James Murphy a while back in which he agreed with your basic sentiment: too much music is being released, and as a consequence most trends are diluted and/or obscured.

I for one am impressed with the diversity of the indie scene at the moment. The stylistic breadth seems wider now than it has ever been in my lifetime. Arguably my two favorite indie acts, Antony & The Johnsons and Iron & Wine, are leagues apart stylistically.
 
I've always felt like complaints that there is "no good new music" are incredibly lazy. if anything, I have FAR more access to good music now than I did in the '80's or '90's, because of the internet. You aren't required to believe what the radio, MTV, or a magazine tell you any more, and can find out for yourself in minutes. Reviews and impressions are available with the click of a button, as are samples and songs.

Certainly those who are still living in the "if it's good it should come to me, not me to it" state of mind, and assume the radio or MTV will tell them what they should be listening to, are going to think everything new now sucks. For anyone who takes even a little time once a month to do their own research, you can find anything you want. Sure, it's probably overwhelming for some to think that they themselves need to actually find music on their own, but that's been the state of affairs for many of us for over a decade now.

If anything, I think the article has it absolutely backwards. "Amateur" music hasn't hurt major label bands by diluting the industry, but instead "major label" music has been hurt by becoming more and more obvious to music fans how bland, unoriginal, and untalented most of their artists are in comparison to the countless other artists fans now have access to.
 
u2popmofo said:
I've always felt like complaints that there is "no good new music" are incredibly lazy. if anything, I have FAR more access to good music now than I did in the '80's or '90's, because of the internet. You aren't required to believe what the radio, MTV, or a magazine tell you any more, and can find out for yourself in minutes. Reviews and impressions are available with the click of a button, as are samples and songs.

Certainly those who are still living in the "if it's good it should come to me, not me to it" state of mind, and assume the radio or MTV will tell them what they should be listening to, are going to think everything new now sucks. For anyone who takes even a little time once a month to do their own research, you can find anything you want. Sure, it's probably overwhelming for some to think that they themselves need to actually find music on their own, but that's been the state of affairs for many of us for over a decade now.

If anything, I think the article has it absolutely backwards. "Amateur" music hasn't hurt major label bands by diluting the industry, but instead "major label" music has been hurt by becoming more and more obvious to music fans how bland, unoriginal, and untalented most of their artists are in comparison to the countless other artists fans now have access to.
Click to expand...

Said much more eloquently than I could've, and I couldn't agree more.

Arguments that say a genre are homogeneous are always ridiculous to me as well. Somebody please explain to me exactly how, say Grizzly Bear sound just like Washed Out or Broken Social Scene. Or how dead prez are carbon copies of Tupac. You can't, because it's simply not true. Of course, similarities are abound, but that's absolutely going to happen in a world where *everything* is derivative--music most of all. Really though, if you're willing to take the time and effort to dive into a genre beyond the two or three big names, there's going to be vast amounts of difference in sound.
 
u2popmofo said:
I've always felt like complaints that there is "no good new music" are incredibly lazy. if anything, I have FAR more access to good music now than I did in the '80's or '90's, because of the internet. You aren't required to believe what the radio, MTV, or a magazine tell you any more, and can find out for yourself in minutes. Reviews and impressions are available with the click of a button, as are samples and songs.

Certainly those who are still living in the "if it's good it should come to me, not me to it" state of mind, and assume the radio or MTV will tell them what they should be listening to, are going to think everything new now sucks. For anyone who takes even a little time once a month to do their own research, you can find anything you want. Sure, it's probably overwhelming for some to think that they themselves need to actually find music on their own, but that's been the state of affairs for many of us for over a decade now.

If anything, I think the article has it absolutely backwards. "Amateur" music hasn't hurt major label bands by diluting the industry, but instead "major label" music has been hurt by becoming more and more obvious to music fans how bland, unoriginal, and untalented most of their artists are in comparison to the countless other artists fans now have access to.
Click to expand...

Admittedly, I probably don't explore every nook and cranny of the internet searching for new music the way some of you do, but it's not like I just sit back waiting for it to come to me, either. I do a fair amount of listening and exploring. Not as much as some of you, but way more than the average music consumer. I certainly don't think I qualify as "lazy," and it's a cop-out to simply put my distaste down to that. Regardless, I still haven't heard much that's stood out to me.

The indie scene was fairly impressive in the early - mid '00s. A lot of great bands broke out around that time. It just seems to me that now, as in other music trends over the decades, dilution is occurring, it's almost inevitable, and it's affecting the quality of what's coming out. As for the indie vs major label argument - is indie thriving because of major labels sucking, or do major labels suck because of artists foregoing the major label route because they have other alternatives - it's a chicken and egg argument. I suspect it's a little of both.

I obviously didn't mean that every band sounds exactly the same, that's just silly. To my ears, the vast majority of them seem to blend into a big pile of meh. I've heard so many artists that I think are just okay in the past two years, I couldn't even begin to count them, but very little has gotten me excited.

Anyway, that's just my view, and I know other longtime music lovers who feel similarly. I know how indietastic this subforum is, so I didn't exactly expect my thoughts to be embraced. :) But sometimes I do miss Zoots and Mr. Brau around here.
 
Hope you didn't take my post like I was calling you out, Vintage Punk. I meant to respond to the article, re-reading it now, I realize what I wrote could have been taken the wrong way. I honestly hadn't even seen that you had also commented after it, and would have worded my response differently had I noticed. Sorry for my own laziness for missing your comments. :wink:

VintagePunk said:
Anyway, that's just my view, and I know other longtime music lovers who feel similarly. I know how indietastic this subforum is, so I didn't exactly expect my thoughts to be embraced. :) But sometimes I do miss Zoots and Mr. Brau around here.
Click to expand...

You'd be surprised how many of us here love independent music and major label bands as well though. Despite my poo-pooing earlier comments, there are still a good number incredibly mainstream bands I follow closely. I sometimes think there's a very incorrect assumption as to how fans of independent music feel in general about music. Just because some like indie music does not inherently make someone a hipster jerkoff who hates anything that Pitchfork tells them to hate.
 
VintagePunk said:
Admittedly, I probably don't explore every nook and cranny of the internet searching for new music the way some of you do, but it's not like I just sit back waiting for it to come to me, either. I do a fair amount of listening and exploring. Not as much as some of you, but way more than the average music consumer. I certainly don't think I qualify as "lazy," and it's a cop-out to simply put my distaste down to that. Regardless, I still haven't heard much that's stood out to me.

The indie scene was fairly impressive in the early - mid '00s. A lot of great bands broke out around that time. It just seems to me that now, as in other music trends over the decades, dilution is occurring, it's almost inevitable, and it's affecting the quality of what's coming out. As for the indie vs major label argument - is indie thriving because of major labels sucking, or do major labels suck because of artists foregoing the major label route because they have other alternatives - it's a chicken and egg argument. I suspect it's a little of both.

I obviously didn't mean that every band sounds exactly the same, that's just silly. To my ears, the vast majority of them seem to blend into a big pile of meh. I've heard so many artists that I think are just okay in the past two years, I couldn't even begin to count them, but very little has gotten me excited.

Anyway, that's just my view, and I know other longtime music lovers who feel similarly. I know how indietastic this subforum is, so I didn't exactly expect my thoughts to be embraced. :) But sometimes I do miss Zoots and Mr. Brau around here.
Click to expand...

I can only speak for myself here, but I check maybe three sites for music regularly. That's not every nook and cranny. If anything, it's easier to find things more quickly with the internet than with radio. And, I tend to get excited about somebody at least once a month...that's why I seek out music. I love that feeling of finding something that hits just right, that clicks, that I want to hear over and over again.

Who, other than the Pearl Jams, Nirvanas, and potentially Pavements, came out of the '90s indie scene and is still relevant today? I anticipate the indie scene of today will be similar—a few make it out, but the vast majority fall into obscurity again.

I really don't think the scenes are that much different. People across the country were making music in their garages or bedrooms in the '90s too. What IS different is the fact that anybody and everybody can record music, upload it, and possibly find an audience today. Does that "water down" the industry? Maybe. But, if you're looking at it from a freedom of information point of view, it's simply amazing. There's absolutely no precedent for this kind of sharing of creativity before the internet.
 
u2popmofo said:
Hope you didn't take my post like I was calling you out, Vintage Punk. I meant to respond to the article, re-reading it now, I realize what I wrote could have been taken the wrong way. I honestly hadn't even seen that you had also commented after it, and would have worded my response differently had I noticed. Sorry for my own laziness for missing your comments. :wink:
Click to expand...

Ha! No problem. :)

You'd be surprised how many of us here love independent music and major label bands as well though. Despite my poo-pooing earlier comments, there are still a good number incredibly mainstream bands I follow closely. I sometimes there's a very incorrect assumption as to how fans of independent music feel in general about music. Just because some like indie music does not inherently make someone a hipster jerkoff.
Click to expand...

I hope I didn't give that impression, I've been trying to find something to get excited about. Other than Vampire Weekend (who are pretty much known as hipster douches now that they have some level of success, no?) it's been a dismal failure.

One thing that I often think of when considering my conundrum is this - in the past year or so, I listened to one of those year end lists on a blog, 50 or 100 songs or something. At the end of it, there were maybe 2 or 3 that didn't leave me feeling eyerolly, and then after I stepped away from the computer, the only song that I could actually recall was that horrid Shakira song, with the wolf thing going on. Fucking Shakira is what stood out to me. I blamed indie music in general for that, and it's been a downward spiral for me ever since. :wink:
 
VintagePunk said:
Anyway, that's just my view, and I know other longtime music lovers who feel similarly. I know how indietastic this subforum is, so I didn't exactly expect my thoughts to be embraced. :) But sometimes I do miss Zoots and Mr. Brau around here.
Click to expand...

It's funny you say this because most of my friends in real life, in fact, almost all of them, wouldn't know even one "indie" band from the past 15 years. And, of course, my tastes and theirs intersect at numerous points, because like most music lovers, my tastes vary and are not limited to one genre or broad label.

And that's exactly why I like this sub-forum, so I can get pointed towards bands I'd normally never come across. I probably like 3, maybe 4 in 10, but that's still me operating in the black, and I'm thankful for it.

Guys like Zoots are great and all, but I don't think he ever once named a song, album or band that I hand't already heard of and had an opinion of. That's not a bad thing, of course...there's nothing wrong with talking about Bon Jovi (take it easy, Laz) with fellow fans....it's just that I can engineer that sort of discussion with just about anyone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

dazzledbylight
Ladies and Gentlemen: The Who
Replies
6
Views
597
dazzledbylight
dazzledbylight
A
The little stranger Chapter 6
Replies
0
Views
559
annj
A
A
The Little stranger chapter 17
Replies
0
Views
525
annj
A
A
the little stranger chapter 4
Replies
0
Views
580
annj
A
A
The little stranger chapter 13
Replies
0
Views
572
annj
A

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom