I started to watch this video a little skeptical that the guy was going to ruin a perfectly good classical piece, but he did it really well. Hope you guys enjoy it as much as I did.
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
Holy cr@p!
I watched that REALLY closely, and I don't think that was faked in terms of him not actually playing the guitar.
Is it possible that was speeded up in playback or something? If not, that guy is truly a phenomenon, IMHO.
I mean, I'm sure there are people out there who could play that with practice, but I wouldn't think that it'd be a very common level of skill to attain.
Please tell me it's not a clever fake.
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
There is a guy named Evan Marshall who plays the Finale from the William Tell Overture on mandolin. Alone. No tricks. I've seen him do it live, it's amazing.
Posted by erosomniac (Member # 6834) on :
quote:I mean, I'm sure there are people out there who could play that with practice, but I wouldn't think that it'd be a very common level of skill to attain.
Please tell me it's not a clever fake.
Watching the finger movements, he's at least able to move his fingering hand as fast as the recording. I don't think it's speeded up. There's a portion in the last third where he's playing up really high on the neck where I'm not sure the fingering is consistent with the sound, but I could just be thrown off by the fact that there's background instrumentation in addition to his playing.
What would actually amaze me more than the speed is the accuracy and fidelity in one take.
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
quote:What would actually amaze me more than the speed is the accuracy and fidelity in one take.
Like I said, there's a guy who does the Finale from the William Tell Overture on a single mandolin, and I've seen him do it live... You just have to practice a WHOLE LOT.
Posted by erosomniac (Member # 6834) on :
quote:Like I said, there's a guy who does the Finale from the William Tell Overture on a single mandolin, and I've seen him do it live... You just have to practice a WHOLE LOT.
I'd actually really like to see that. Happen to know the name of the performer?
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
The bends look consistent to me. I've seen several very good fakes where the bends were the giveaway.
There were a few discontinuities in his fingering that were probably dropped frames on my display but could indicate splicing.
Also, there's a "squeak" when he's doing the fast fingering on the 20th+ fret that seems consistent with things I've seen live, but I haven't seen enough to be sure.
Impressive either way, but way, way more impressive if it's real.
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
quote:I'd actually really like to see that. Happen to know the name of the performer?
I posted it above. Evan Marshall. You can hear it on his CD "The Lone Arranger".
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
Damn you, Quicktime requirement! Damn you, work computer!
I suppose this means I should get back to work, instead of getting paid to read forums >_<.
Posted by Primal Curve (Member # 3587) on :
I see no reason to believe it's not real. I mean, he fudged a few times but was able to recover and make it sound good. Not that I can play like that on any level.
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
Oh, no! You don't have Quicktime at work? Oh, no! We just watched it and my daughter was dancing and clapping and laughing. Posted by Goody Scrivener (Member # 6742) on :
Wow this guy is amazing!
Posted by erosomniac (Member # 6834) on :
You're a mean woman, Kqueen. Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
PC, I agree. There were a few skips/lags, but I think that was WMP, not him.
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
I know, erosomniac, I know. My husband tells me all the time. Posted by Primal Curve (Member # 3587) on :
This guy should be shot for hosting such rediculously huge files. I mean, the song wasn't even really that long and it took FOREVER to download his video. I suppose that probably put me in a sour mood because I wasn't so impressed.
Posted by Primal Curve (Member # 3587) on :
quote:Originally posted by ketchupqueen: PC, I agree. There were a few skips/lags, but I think that was WMP, not him.
That's not quite what I meant. I meant that he started in on some fast fills and just kind of muddled them up or completely missed the notes, but was able to make it sound on purpose anyways.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:This guy should be shot for hosting such rediculously huge files. I mean, the song wasn't even really that long and it took FOREVER to download his video. I suppose that probably put me in a sour mood because I wasn't so impressed.
That guy should be given an award for hosting files whose video quality doesn't absolutely suck.
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
quote:That's not quite what I meant. I meant that he started in on some fast fills and just kind of muddled them up or completely missed the notes, but was able to make it sound on purpose anyways.
And that's not what I meant. I got what you meant. I was just saying that the only things I noticed wrong that anyone had mentioned above were not, IMO, the result of editing, but of the file quality/playback quality. I was just agreeing with you that I saw no reason to call it fake. Posted by erosomniac (Member # 6834) on :
Yeah, damn him for refusing to compromise on quality...
Dial-up users have no place complaining about download times, anyway (you are using dial-up, right? 'Cause those stream more or less instantly even on my workplace's craptacular DSL connection).
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
I love my cable internet. Posted by Altáriël of Dorthonion (Member # 6473) on :
Well I just watched it too Ersomaniac. All I can say is, sucks to be you. Posted by Altáriël of Dorthonion (Member # 6473) on :
quote:Originally posted by ketchupqueen: I love my cable internet.
I love my T1.
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
Our choices here are dial-up or cable. Since cable internet plus cable tv-- all the channels except the premium ones like HBO and Cinemax and stuff-- are $52 a month...
Posted by erosomniac (Member # 6834) on :
quote:Our choices here are dial-up or cable. Since cable internet plus cable tv-- all the channels except the premium ones like HBO and Cinemax and stuff-- are $52 a month...
&$)(#@*$#@
I have basic cable and cable internet at home...$97 a month after taxes and fees. *SIGH*
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:Damn you, Quicktime requirement!
Let me take this opportunity to recommend "Quicktime Alternative" and "Real Alternative". All they do is allow you to play those files. They odn't try to take over your computer at all.
Posted by erosomniac (Member # 6834) on :
I use QTAlt at home - just not here at work, where to modify anything computer related without permission is to risk death.
Posted by Goody Scrivener (Member # 6742) on :
Yeah, I had the lowest tier of digital cable alogn with internet (cause I couldn't get analog cable and internet at the same time) and my bill was 115 a month. Without the internet (because I switched to DSL through the phone company at 15 a month), I'm currently paying 62 for the same digital service. I just started investigating dish options. My biggest concern is where to put the dish since I'm in an apartment and I don't think the landlord will like me having holes drilled into the tuckpointing.
Oh, and the 12 year old loves the Canon piece... even the cat looked like she was headbanging!
Posted by Swampjedi (Member # 7374) on :
<stunned>
Simply amazing.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
If you guys like classical electric, check out the raging Bachofile Johanshlack. He has a website you can google it, no time for a link. But he plays alot of cool bach stuff, eg, Cello suite in G reloaded, etc.
PS- what's the fuss? Ive seen this video, its not very impressive. The guy is using foot pedals to control volume/tone etc, besides that its nothing a competent rocker couldn't do if he had enough spare time on his hands. Actually I prefer the japanese guy who playes mario brothers themes with sound effects.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:check out the raging Bachofile Johanshlack. He has a website you can google it
Google had zero hits for Johanshlack.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
I assumed you would know I am retarded in the spelling department...
johannschlack
Posted by Primal Curve (Member # 3587) on :
quote:Originally posted by erosomniac: Yeah, damn him for refusing to compromise on quality...
Dial-up users have no place complaining about download times, anyway (you are using dial-up, right? 'Cause those stream more or less instantly even on my workplace's craptacular DSL connection).
Pfft. I have a 5Mbit downstream.
Posted by Friday (Member # 8998) on :
You may also be interested in Jake Shimabukuro. He's an increadible ukulele player, there was a fairly impressive video of him covering the Beatles' "While my guitar gently weeps" floating around the net a while back. It's amazing what these guys can do with their instruments.
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
I should clarify that our cable is not digital. Less perks. But I still get SciFi and the Food Network and USA and TNT (for my SVU/L&O/CI fix), not to mention reception in general (around here all you get without cable or satellite is fuzz) so I'm happy. Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
To me, knowing that there are others who are great out there only makes the world an even better place. I don't know who this guy is, but I'm impressed that he did this. Great musicianship doesn't mean never making an error, either.
Heck, I just think this guy has attained a skill level that is uncommon. And I applaud him for taking the time and having the patience to do it.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
quote:there was a fairly impressive video of him covering the Beatles' "While my guitar gently weeps" floating around the net a while back. It's amazing what these guys can do with their instruments.
I remember that, it was freaking sweet.
Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :
Obviously none of you have ever heard of Yngwie Malmsteen. Have a listen to either Trilogy Suite Opus (one piece), or Concerto Suite for Electric Guitar and Orchestra in E Flat Minor (an album).
Posted by aspectre (Member # 2222) on :
Wow you'd need some amazing finger muscles to do those hammerons on that Dueling Ninjas one.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
That dueling ninjas thing is also bad***.
*bookmarks page*
Posted by Primal Curve (Member # 3587) on :
quote:Originally posted by twinky: Obviously none of you have ever heard of Yngwie Malmsteen. Have a listen to either Trilogy Suite Opus (one piece), or Concerto Suite for Electric Guitar and Orchestra in E Flat Minor (an album).
Oh, I know Malsteen. He's a geetar GAWD and I love listening to him. However, he dresses like a total knob. I just can't reconcile his awesomeness with his gooberish image.
Posted by erosomniac (Member # 6834) on :
Malmsteen is fantastic, but I (like most people, I think...?) tend to judge amateur work by a different standard than, you know, guitar legends.
I mean, my friend can play Tears in Heaven really well and the emotion he puts into it is fantastic, but he's not CLAPTON.
quote:You may also be interested in Jake Shimabukuro. He's an increadible ukulele player, there was a fairly impressive video of him covering the Beatles' "While my guitar gently weeps" floating around the net a while back. It's amazing what these guys can do with their instruments.
Jake is amazing. Ukulele fretwork gets very undersold because it's 4 nylon strings, but really...it's awesome.
Posted by Eldrad (Member # 8578) on :
That Evan Marshall clip was incredible, not to mention Trace Bundy (I would assume that's his name). Seeing him reminded me of another musician you guys might want to check out named Anthony Mazzella. As far as I know, he doesn't cover classical stuff but just writes his own; it's absolutely amazing, though, especially if you can see videos of him playing. I don't think I've ever seen a better guitarist in my life. My school holds a thing every weekend for the students (mainly to encourage them to do something that isn't drinking) at which he performed, so I got to see him play live. Some of the best few hours of my life. I'll check to see if I can find some videos of him floating around.
Edit: Here's a link I found to a ten minute clip on his website, though sometimes it's hard to see him playing. Maybe there's a better one floating around out there. http://www.anthonymazzella.com/movies2.html Posted by erosomniac (Member # 6834) on :
Also for sheer weirdness/coolness factor, check out Rodney Brannigan:
Two guitars at once!
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
I really HATE be a naysayer (yah right) but common, really? The novelty is dimished by the shear improbability of the thing. Its a neat trick, but can this guy do anything but maybe one peice on two guitars? If can, well then alright.
Posted by erosomniac (Member # 6834) on :
(sigh)
Yes, he does more than one piece on two guitars. He's known for playing several pieces on two guitars, as well as playing a guitar and playing percussion simultaneously, while singing.
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
My dad can do both of those (he doesn't do well on two guitars at once, but that's because he hasn't practiced. I have seen him do it.) He also does the thing where he plays guitar and takes a harmonica break simultaneously, which also takes practice.
He also plays guitar in his sleep. That one is very, very amusing.
Posted by erosomniac (Member # 6834) on :
quote:He also plays guitar in his sleep. That one is very, very amusing.
You do realize that you are now morally obligated to break the bonds of filial piety and film this, right?
Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :
quote:Originally posted by erosomniac: Malmsteen is fantastic, but I (like most people, I think...?) tend to judge amateur work by a different standard than, you know, guitar legends.
That's true. I just didn't think the original video was all that special. I think that people who thought it was the bee's knees could stand to listen to some Malmsteen. [Added: Also, I felt it was a very passionless performance. That was a turn-off.]
The stuff that you and others have posted in the thread since then was great, though. Particularly that ukelele one, that was exquisite. [Added: And you could tell that he was really getting into it and could feel the music. I'm not too big on the Beatles, but that really was something.]
Posted by erosomniac (Member # 6834) on :
quote:That's true. I just didn't think the original video was all that special. I think that people who thought it was the bee's knees could stand to listen to some Malmsteen. [Added: Also, I felt it was a very passionless performance. That was a turn-off.]
It was pretty passionless, but I think that was the goal: to make playing what he played seem casual. To some that's going to make it seem even cooler, although I am not one of "some."
quote:The stuff that you and others have posted in the thread since then was great, though. Particularly that ukelele one, that was exquisite. [Added: And you could tell that he was really getting into it and could feel the music. I'm not too big on the Beatles, but that really was something.]
Every time I see Jake live, I remember why I like him so much: not just because of his fretwork, but because so much of the energy and raw passion he has for playing his music translates both audibly and visually. It really, really comes through in Ehime Maru, the song he wrote in commemoration of the sinking of the ship of the same name.
Posted by Uprooted (Member # 8353) on :
Well, I must say I've been enjoying all the links -- thanks, everyone! (and especially grateful for the recently upgraded DSL connection that enables me to watch these . . .)
I also really enjoyed listening to the mandolinist's rendition of Summertime (from the website link kq gave)--can't remember the guy's name and am too lazy to go back to page one to look.
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
quote:You do realize that you are now morally obligated to break the bonds of filial piety and film this, right?
Oh, I totally would if I ever happened to have a video camera (which neither he nor I own) while he was doing it...
Posted by GaalDornick (Member # 8880) on :
"Obviously none of you have ever heard of Yngwie Malmsteen."
Steve Vai owns Malmsteen And Joe Satriani is pretty good too My favorite guitarist might be John Petrucci, though. He's great.
Posted by Shan (Member # 4550) on :
quote:Originally posted by twinky: Obviously none of you have ever heard of Yngwie Malmsteen. Have a listen to either Trilogy Suite Opus (one piece), or Concerto Suite for Electric Guitar and Orchestra in E Flat Minor (an album).
Well, bless you for mentioning him, Twink. I was scrolling though to see if anyone had remembered those magic fingers . . .
KQ - I am waiting anxiously for that video. Posted by GaalDornick (Member # 8880) on :
I just found this on Google. Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :
quote:Originally posted by GaalDornick: "Obviously none of you have ever heard of Yngwie Malmsteen."
Steve Vai owns Malmsteen And Joe Satriani is pretty good too My favorite guitarist might be John Petrucci, though. He's great.
I like Vai and Satriani well enough, but I definitely prefer Malmsteen. Probably my classical upbringing.
However, I'm also a real sucker for Slash. Posted by Eldrad (Member # 8578) on :
quote:Originally posted by GaalDornick: I just found this on Google.
That guy doesn't seem to be quite as good as the others, since his notes don't flow well into each other. Just my opinion, though.
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
Much as I hate dead threads...
I was playing on YouTube and found the mandolin video again. Since it's apparently been removed from the website (why waste your bandwidth when you can post on YouTube?) they moved it to YouTube, apparently.
And it's always worth re-watching Evan Marshall play the William Tell.
You know, a song I would love to see played on Guitar is Mozart's Rondo Alla Turca from Piano Sanata in A.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
quote:Originally posted by Bob_Scopatz: To me, knowing that there are others who are great out there only makes the world an even better place. I don't know who this guy is, but I'm impressed that he did this. Great musicianship doesn't mean never making an error, either.
Heck, I just think this guy has attained a skill level that is uncommon. And I applaud him for taking the time and having the patience to do it.
Yes, Bob.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
I didn't realize it until i held one, but a mandolin is really sort of a ukelele with double strings.
I also came to the grand epiphany this summer that a 12 string guitar is the same thing(doubles of the six string)
I am a bit slow.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
I think one of the problems with the guitar-via-youtube phenomenon is that it really fetishizes certian aspects of guitar playing and players more than any other medium, notwithstanding "hair bands."
oooh look, the guy is playing guitar with a spoon, with his buttcheeks, at the top of a space needle, and he's only 2 years old, and on and on.
Music is about artistic accomplishment, communication, and ideas. I don't think it should be a sport. Just me, not appreciating the "guitar hero" generation.
Posted by BandoCommando (Member # 7746) on :
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro: I think one of the problems with the guitar-via-youtube phenomenon is that it really fetishizes certian aspects of guitar playing and players more than any other medium, notwithstanding "hair bands."
oooh look, the guy is playing guitar with a spoon, with his buttcheeks, at the top of a space needle, and he's only 2 years old, and on and on.
Music is about artistic accomplishment, communication, and ideas. I don't think it should be a sport. Just me, not appreciating the "guitar hero" generation.
At least you don't have middle school students coming up to you asking to audition for the guitar spot in your jazz band, convinced they can play guitar because of their experience with Guitar Hero....
Posted by Paul Goldner (Member # 1910) on :
"teve Vai owns Malmsteen And Joe Satriani is pretty good too My favorite guitarist might be John Petrucci, though. He's great."
THose four all have different styles. I'm not sure how you compare the different styles, and say "This one is better then that one."
Malmsteen has VERY classical inspiration, Satriani plays straight ahead rock, and Vai is very... I call it funkadelic, but thats not really right. They go for different sounds, and all three get their sound superbly.
Malmsteen is a freak of nature, though. I'm not sure anyone else can play as fast as he does.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
Well, there is another reason people put things on youtube, I am afraid to say. It is easier to share things with family and friends. This is why we do it, anyway. I am not trying to make my son into some sort of fetish. The child playing Canon in D is a pure musican. You can see it on his face. I recognize that look. Music flows through some people, whether they are making it up or learning it from a sheet. He is just darned good.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
Paul, I'm afraid I've heard far too many lists of far too many different names of people who are sworn to be unlike anyome else- with guitar I care less and less all the time.
Elizabeth- The abstractions of "pure musicianship" are a little hard to swallow when the kid is playing a by the numbers rendition of a highly, highly overrated movement from a classical suite. The "look" doesn't interest me, at all. And what he's playing is not inventive, it's boring. That's my opinion, but I would wager without really knowing that I have been to more concerts than you have, and have met more musicians. That doesn't make me better, but I think it gives me a fair amount of experience recognizing talent vs. hard work, vs both together.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
Really, Orincoro. Well, I will just leave this discussion to you, then! I am sure you have been to many more concerts than I have, and I would love to hear about all the musicians you know!
Nonetheless, I will adhere to me own very immature and ignorant feeling that this child has "it."
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
Orincoro, you really shouldn't make wagers like that. You almost certainly lose this one.
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro: . . . I would wager without really knowing that I have been to more concerts than you have, and have met more musicians.
Ooh! Ooh! Can I take that bet?!
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
Like I set I don't know, and I'm not putting anything up.
Elizabeth, please understand that while I realize it's pretty dumb to say: "I know more than you so shut up," I do think, judging from your opinion in this case, that I do. This doesn't mean shut up, but I guess I could pick a better way of arguing my position. I know I could, but I'm actually just being lazy.
Dag, I go to about three concerts a week and have done for over 3 years. So, I don't see why I am almost certain to lose.
Icky, I don't extend the wager to you, but I'd love to hear your opinion.
Meh, everybody: I apologize for my childishness, but threads and subjects like this remind me of what a selfish knowiatall jerk I like to be when it comes to certain things I don't think everyone's opinion is totally valid all the time, including my own.
"Nonetheless, I will adhere to me own very immature and ignorant feeling that this child has "it.""
Yeah, well, you're wrong.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
Elizabeth:
The kid's good. I'm glad you posted that link.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:Dag, I go to about three concerts a week and have done for over 3 years. So, I don't see why I am almost certain to lose.
Three whole years of that? Wow.
I'll change "almost certain to lose" to "very likely to lose" then.
quote:Elizabeth, please understand that while I realize it's pretty dumb to say: "I know more than you so shut up," I do think, judging from your opinion in this case, that I do.
Wow. An appeal to authority based on circular logic. That's talented fallacyin'!
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
Ok Dag, I don't care. I'm 23 years old, yesterday in fact, and I'm pretty proud of what I've done with my life so far. So you can go suck on it.
Matt: I love that video, if it's the one about Pachelbell chasing the comedian through his life.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:Ok Dag, I don't care. I'm 23 years old, yesterday in fact, and I'm pretty proud of what I've done with my life so far. So you can go suck on it.
That's rich. I haven't said anything to denigrate what you've done with your life. That's your game, remember.
You're being really rude to and about a friend of mine, and a large part of your rudeness is based on ignorance of to whom you are talking. She's being nice about it, but I'm not in a mood to let it go quietly.
If you want to disagree about what's good music or not, do so without making unsupportable commentary about others' qualifications to do so.
Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
Having been a professional musician for several years, and with a degree in music performance, I'd have to say, particularly with an instrument like guitar, unless you play the damn thing yourself, you have no real idea of the relative difficulty of different pieces. IME, that's very true even on percussion instruments and the piano, and I have extensive experience with both, and the guitar uses much smaller movements (which makes it much less easy to judge a player's ability and also harder to judge the difficulty level of a piece that's being played in front of you). IOW, if you don't play guitar, you're in no position to judge a player's ability level. Point blank.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
quote:Originally posted by Scott R: Elizabeth:
The kid's good. I'm glad you posted that link.
The Canon in D guy, or Aidan? Thanks if the latter!
Orincoro, I am not quite twice your age, but pretty close. I grew up in the 70's, and we saw a lot of music. I am also pretty close to a hippy, though more of a conservative one.
I am addicted to live music. My son is addicted to playing live music, after listening to so many shows. We go to a lot of music festivals. We have developed friendships with many musicians, and Aidan has been blessed with some wonderful opportunities.
What I want to know is, can this boy, Sungha, improvise? If he can, if he can develop that, he will be unstoppable.
My son can play with any group at the drop of a hat. He can also play well technically, but his true gift is as an improvisational artist. If he could learn to play those finger-pickin riffs, he will also be unstoppable.
I would give my eye teeth to have them play together some day.
(sorry for the ramble)
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by steven: Having been a professional musician for several years, and with a degree in music performance, I'd have to say, particularly with an instrument like guitar, unless you play the damn thing yourself, you have no real idea of the relative difficulty of different pieces. IME, that's very true even on percussion instruments and the piano, and I have extensive experience with both, and the guitar uses much smaller movements (which makes it much less easy to judge a player's ability and also harder to judge the difficulty level of a piece that's being played in front of you). IOW, if you don't play guitar, you're in no position to judge a player's ability level. Point blank.
I do play classical guitar, though I think you're wrong anyway. That musicianship and ability to be musical is correlated to specific experience is not correct, I think. Technical elements of playing are hard, but not impossible for a player of another instrument to understand. If what you say is true, then composers would have insurmountable difficulties in writing for any instrument they do not play. There are difficulties, as I have discovered myself many times, but these problems are not crippling, and they do not diminish our abilities to judge other people's skill level.
Besides technical skill is beside my point- I don't think his playing is very good. It could be twice as fast, and not alter my opinion, that ability to do something technical would not improve the musical experience necessarily. Though accomplishing technical feats is a means to expression, it is far from an end, and is for many many players, a real crutch.
Edit: And example that pops to mind is Pat Methany, who is very technically accomplished, but hasn't been involved in interesting music for quite some time. Still, I did see him in concert here last year and it was enjoyable to a point- partly because Brad Meldaugh (piano) played with him.
[ February 24, 2008, 09:18 PM: Message edited by: Orincoro ]
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dagonee: [QUOTE] You're being really rude to and about a friend of mine, and a large part of your rudeness is based on ignorance of to whom you are talking. She's being nice about it, but I'm not in a mood to let it go quietly.
If you want to disagree about what's good music or not, do so without making unsupportable commentary about others' qualifications to do so.
I am not ignorant of whom I am addressing. I am addressing the person who wrote what I am responding to. I disagree with their opinions, and their opinions lead me to believe that they are less informed than I am.
I don't have an advocate arguing in my favor here, and if I did, I certainly wouldn't want it to be someone like you, who has no history of being able to relate to me.
So as I said before, I especially don't care what you think, especially since you contribute little more than to tell me when I already know I'm being a dick.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:I am not ignorant of whom I am addressing. I am addressing the person who wrote what I am responding to. I disagree with their opinions, and their opinions lead me to believe that they are less informed than I am.
You were ignorant of significant facts that render your factual assertion very likely wrong.
quote:So as I said before, I especially don't care what you think, especially since you contribute little more than to tell me when I already know I'm being a dick.
Awareness is the first step toward recovery.
Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
"...composers would have insurmountable difficulties in writing for any instrument they do not play."
Beethoven's music is still some of the hardest stuff on orchestral excerpt lists. I think I paraphrase him when he said "What do I care for your damned fiddle?" when a player complained about the difficulty of a part. I think he neither knew nor cared. It's still good (by most people's estimation) music. It does not happen to fit the instrument well. However, I, not being a (for instance) orchestral bassist, have no idea how much harder the bass part is from the Scherzo in his first symphony than from any other similar-sounding passage. I'd say the same is true for almost any instrument with a fingerboard, fretted or not, including guitar. My buddy Dan got his degree in classical guitar, and likes to play me Eric Johnson licks, and talk about how much harder they are than other players' licks. I simply have to take his word for it. He plays other fast stuff that sounds (and looks) to be about the same difficulty.
I guess what I'm saying is, no way does a non-guitarist have the ability to judge the difficulty level of a piece by watching someone play it. IMHO.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
The canon in D guy I found boring, actually. I can't figure out how he made the sounds he made-- but it's magic I don't really find interesting.
Aidan, however, seems very talented, and I enjoyed listening to him play.
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
Orincoro -- why continue a behavior you think of so negatively?
Technical prowess is something that can be appreciated on many levels, by the way, as can emotional playing. Of the two, I think technical prowess is more easily achieved and recognizable by others -- like the ability to play the Minute Waltz in 39 seconds -- we could measure it and deduct for errors.
When people educated in technique start talking about the "soul" or emotion that a player puts into their performance, then I think they start to sound a lot like the rest of us -- using vaguely defined terms to express something that is genuinely indefinable and often more a matter of personal taste than anything concrete.
I've nearly been brought to tears by a young girl singing Amazing Grace. I've had shivers run down my spine watching an arthritic semi-retired dancer move in subtle ways that conveyed 10x what their well-trained and physically fit troupe members were doing. I seen legends phone in a cynical performance and walk off stage in anger.
And I've been around people who had the exact opposite reaction to many of the things I loved and hated.
It's a good thing too, or we'd all be stuck listening to the same darned things that "everybody likes" and all music would be dictated by the popular taste.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
The canon in D guy I found boring, actually. I can't figure out how he made the sounds he made-- but it's magic I don't really find interesting.
Aidan, however, seems very talented, and I enjoyed listening to him play.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
Thanks, Scott.
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
steven,
I can do things on drums that not many others cannot, and I have a very hard time with things that others find completely easy.
I don't think what you're saying is really a complete statement on the issue of how one appreciates difficulty of a particular bit of musicianship.
(oops edited to fix something)
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
Yes, Bob! Thank heavens we do not all think the same things are good!
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
quote:Originally posted by Elizabeth: Yes, Bob! Thank heavens we do not all think the same things are good!
But I love all the music you send me.
(Yes, I've been bought off, and I'm proud of it)
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
Ha ha!
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dagonee: Awareness is the first step toward recovery.
Also the easiest.
Bob, I think your comments are very astute. I do think however that the arthritic dancer you mentioned has been well trained in what really matters. As you say, the conveyance of so much meaning in such an economical way is something very powerful, and recognizing it is a moving experience. I do think that we can see and understand a great deal of that element of performance, and the same eement in composition, and that it isn't totally undefinable. I don't want to say "open to interpretation," because that's a bit of a weak image for me. Maybe "encouraging of" or "receptive to" insight, or "complicating."
As anyone who has followed my music stuff here, which is maybe one of you, you can see that for all people the mobile, applicable elements of music or composing are defined differently. A perfunctory gesture for me is wrung out by a composer with a different purpose. Other people appreciate what I do but would have little reason or ability to things the same way. I, in turn, am moved by things I don't try to repeat. Still, I think trying to recognize those qualities and apply them to our thinking makes us better at our own art. In this particular case with Pachelbell, I have found all of the best elements of his music to be thoroughly absorbed across the musical spectrum, and I don't find his original work to be quite as genuine in its presentation today. The weight of the history with that piece is as much a liability for it as an advantage. I think alot of musicians roll their eyes at its continued domination of the popular ear because they know that broader horizons present themselves in the more extended view of the repertoire.
Pachelbell, even in his day, wrote derivative, by the numbers music. It presents great avenues for learning and understanding very solidly constructed stylistic aspects of Baroque music, but I personally feel that the artistic elements of a piece, the really cool stuff, the challenging stuff, is lacking in it. I think there's a very good reason so many arrangements and interpretations exist, and that is because it is safe, easy, and such a solid part of the repertoire and the common ear, that few seriously question it when it is presented in almost any form. We like ice-cream. We like ice-cream so much that we will eat it in thousands of flavors. A diet of large amounts of ice-cream though, even if the flavors are varied, is quite a bit more sugar than we need.
I will say too that given the pervasive use of the theme from that piece, and in the style in which it is presented by this kid, encourages people to simply connect with all the experiences they have already had with both the original, and all of the work influenced by it. It's no different, to me, from watching that horrible Leonardo Dicapprio rendition of Romeo and Juliette. Oh look, isn't it amazing how Shakespeare even had a direct influence on gangster films from the 20th century! Let's construct an unoriginal mashup of the two genres with hilariously self-serious and concomitantly uninformed and ridiculous performances that do justice to the best of neither genre!
But hey, what a great date movie.
[ February 25, 2008, 12:57 AM: Message edited by: Orincoro ]
Posted by Launchywiggin (Member # 9116) on :
quote:As anyone who has followed my music stuff here, which is maybe one of you
Hey Lloyd. How was your big 23?
On the current subject, I've learned to tone down my "elitism" that comes from having graduated with a music degree. I generally let people like what they like--and if they're curious, I let them know how much deeper it can go. I will say in Lloyd's defense that most music majors attend at least 30 concerts a semester for 4 years, not including outside performances (and at our school, not including concerts you perform in, even for just 1 piece--I hated that rule). In that time, we see a wider spectrum of different genres in Eastern, Western, Classical and contemporary music than most people see in their entire lives. Aside from live music, the hours of poring over recordings and scores (that only some music majors do) adds a depth of knowledge and perspective that is hard for a lot of people to understand--and with Lloyd's particular tone--it's easy to say "whatever smartypants" and dismiss him outright.
I don't know if I've helped at all, Lloyd But I agree with most of his points. Except I did like Baz Luhrman's R&J Radiohead's "Talk Show Host" is one of my faaavorite songs.
And--to add my own perspective--I don't think I'm capable of enjoying any version of Canon in D ever again. The "rockified" version of it in the youtube video reminded me of a mountain dew commercial. I imagined 15-year olds moshing as Sum 41 crashed his bedroom and started singing about their latest summer crush, and they're all riding skateboards. So--regardless of how technically impressive it is (on a scale of 1-10, it's generously a 6), it's basically a lot of effort wasted, in my opinion.
Also, on the subject of improvisation, I've unfortunately become a bit jaded. Once you learn the "structure" of improvisation (knowing your chord-scale-mode relationships), it becomes quite easy (no, really) to learn. It's treated mystically because it's so rarely taught--but it really is just another skill that can easily be taught. In the video, for example, all of his "improvised" embellishments were highly idiomatic (easy), and not very creative--by the book, in fact, especially given the underlying structure of Canon in D. I would claim that it's impossible to see whether this kid "has it" as a musician based on his selection and style--they don't allow him to show any real finesse or depth!
The kid playing blues guitar is cool, but really, anyone who's learned a blues instrument knows that "the blues" are the most accessible and easily attained skills to learn. I become extremely picky about where the "great" blues stuff is, because "average" is everywhere. For the record, considering the kid's age, he's playing above-average blues, for sure.
[ February 25, 2008, 02:20 AM: Message edited by: Launchywiggin ]
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
Orincoro, you are such a snob. Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
Thanks TD, I should keep a tally of the times you've told me that over the years.
Thanks LW as well. Unfortunate that we've never played together. Certianly the next time I'm in town we should do more than go to a museum after I've had 4 hours of sleep. I think I probably made a rather boring impression. You were the last person I saw in the US aside from my sister though, so I think that makes it more memorable at least for me.
I also had a kind of argument with my composition teacher about a research project I'm doing. It isn't his mentorship actually, but he was right to call me out on doing a rather lackluster job on my abstract last week, so I think I've been feeling nervy and defensive for a few days. It's funny, I forget sometimes that the fact that a professor is spending two plus hours a week with me on my projects is an indication that he doesn't think I'm stupid, but he criticizes me on my shoddy work in another area and I'm totally defensive about it.
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
quote:The kid playing blues guitar is cool, but really, anyone who's learned a blues instrument knows that "the blues" are the most accessible and easily attained skills to learn. I become extremely picky about where the "great" blues stuff is, because "average" is everywhere.
The technical aspect of the blues is one of the most accessible and easily attained skills, for sure. The soul-- THAT is something you either have to be born with, or suffer for.
Posted by ElJay (Member # 6358) on :
Orincoro and Launchywiggin, I'm not sure you both realize that "the kid playing the blues guitar" that Elizabeth posted is her son, Aidan, not some random kid she found on YouTube.
Posted by Launchywiggin (Member # 9116) on :
What's the measure of "Soul", though? The look on their face while they're playing? I wish I could agree with you, but I've heard way too many perfectly "manufactured" blues solos to be able to. All it takes is the ability to listen to a recording and have the patience to learn it. A few hours at most for an average guitarist (or in my case, pianist).
I play a damn good blues solo, but it comes from a knowledge of blues scales, common "licks", and listening to recordings, not from suffering or innate talent (I also highly contest that anyone is "born with" anything but a capacity to LEARN). It doesn't take some magic wand that touches some and not others--just hard work). So while it's a nice thought to think that the best blues comes from the soul, I've found that this isn't necessarily true.
Edited to Add: I had no idea about the kid in the blues video being Elizabeth's son. Nobody has said anything till now, and I hope I haven't said anything personally offensive--I probably would have been more tactful if I'd known sooner (and I don't think I should have been expected to know), but thanks for letting me know anyway, EIJay.
[ February 25, 2008, 07:30 AM: Message edited by: Launchywiggin ]
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
It's worth noting, BTW, that my brother is a music composition major. I consider it the worst possible thing to happen to his ability to actually compose listenable music -- which is, as far as I'm concerned, the only kind of music worth producing. He's spent the last two years researching an obscure East European immigrant who died in obscurity in New York after writing a few piano pieces that are so deliberately dissonant that they go through dissonance and come out the other side. Andy's an astonishingly talented pianist, but there's no way to tell from what he's been playing lately; the pieces are of enormous technical difficulty, but they're so mind-gratingly awful to listen to, so deliberately horrible, that the only way to suppose he's played a wrong note is if something briefly sounds okay.
Posted by sylvrdragon (Member # 3332) on :
Reminds me of that one episode of house where he triggers a seizure in that musician with his own music.
Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
quote:Originally posted by ElJay: Orincoro and Launchywiggin, I'm not sure you both realize that "the kid playing the blues guitar" that Elizabeth posted is her son, Aidan, not some random kid she found on YouTube.
Yep. And Aidan has recognized as being talented and worthy of inviting to jam sessions by noted musicians in the field. That's not a pity play -- this isn't an invitation extended every week to the favorite student from the local junior high.
Even if he weren't that good, it would be tacky to try to score points off someone's post about how much they admired their own son.
---
Edited to add:
quote:Originally posted by Elizabeth: Well, there is another reason people put things on youtube, I am afraid to say. It is easier to share things with family and friends. This is why we do it, anyway. I am not trying to make my son into some sort of fetish.
I thought Elizabeth was pretty clear about it.
Posted by erosomniac (Member # 6834) on :
Yeah, I didn't know anything about Elizabeth's family, but her posts here made it pretty obvious that the video she linked was her son, whose name is Aidan, since she makes that connection several times.
Posted by Launchywiggin (Member # 9116) on :
Again, I apologize for not being able to infer that the kid in the video was her son. The link said "My favorite guitar player"--and I don't know who Elizabeth is. All the references to "her son" and "Aidan" could have been something completely different from the video posted, and I don't like to make assumptions on the internet, so it's not "pretty obvious" or "pretty clear" to everyone.
edited accordingly.
[ February 25, 2008, 01:20 PM: Message edited by: Launchywiggin ]
Posted by ElJay (Member # 6358) on :
I clarified because I did not think that Elizabeth's post made it explicit that the video was of her son, Aidan. It could certainly be inferred from all her posts on the thread, but some people pick up on those things faster than others, and some pay more attention to detail than others. *shrug* I wanted the information out there before anyone did say something regretable.
Posted by erosomniac (Member # 6834) on :
quote:Originally posted by Launchywiggin: so it's not "pretty obvious" or "pretty clear" except to you folks with 10,000+ posts that all know each other.
quote:Originally posted by me: I didn't know anything about Elizabeth's family
quote:My post count: 4091
Posted by Launchywiggin (Member # 9116) on :
*deleted*
[ February 25, 2008, 01:24 PM: Message edited by: Launchywiggin ]
Posted by erosomniac (Member # 6834) on :
All I did was point out that your blanket statement appears immediately after an example which proves it wrong.
Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
I am glad ElJay spelled it out in very clear language.
quote:Originally posted by Launchywiggin: [edited text]
I do not level accusation against you that you are trying to score points.
[ February 25, 2008, 02:24 PM: Message edited by: ClaudiaTherese ]
Posted by Launchywiggin (Member # 9116) on :
I'm sorry about my defensive tone. I'm having a bad day and I don't like confrontation, in person or online. I've edited my post and will quietly step back and continue lurking.
Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
Launchywiggin, I was just out walking around on errands, and this was on my mind.
Some things are blindingly obvious to me. I think that even if I hadn't known Elizabeth, this one would be. However -- a very big however! -- I know for a sure fact that there are things blindingly obvious to others of which I am utterly and completely unaware.
I think my own utter lack of awareness meant I wasn't able to read your posts as if you could possibly not have gotten it. I was clueless. Looking back now, I can see where someone could have passed over it, especially if one was reading quickly (as one tends to do, catching up on a thread with some long posts).
I'm sorry that my lack of insight and self-awareness led directly to my being rude to you, and I am sorry for that rudeness as well.
Don't just lurk, okay? Please? *winning smile
---
PS: Will edit my posts to reflect your edits
Posted by Launchywiggin (Member # 9116) on :
I appreciate that CT, though you weren't being rude at all, really. Don't forget that it's my inability to make seemingly obvious connections like this that caused the problem.
Also--to Tom, I think it's really cool that your brother's name is Andy--considering we're both pianists and composers. To top it off, my dad's name is Tom.
As for dissonant music--"listenable" is really relative over time. The effects of dissonant 20th-Century music are seen even in the easily-accessible John Williams scores and the like. Also--once you've been forced to listen to it awhile, it becomes much easier.
I, for one, still like my poetry to rhyme and my music to be tonal.
Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :
quote:Originally posted by Launchywiggin: The effects of dissonant 20th-Century music are seen even in the easily-accessible John Williams scores and the like.
Or for that matter, bands like King Crimson and Mr. Bungle. Posted by GaalDornick (Member # 8880) on :
" "the blues" are the most accessible and easily attained skills to learn."
What's the difference between a Blues musician and a Jazz musician?
A Jazz musician plays a thousand chords in front of three people. A Blues musician plays three chords in front of a thousand people. Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
Launchy: there is no measure of soul. And there doesn't have to be. Either you feel it, or you don't. If technical training at your level has removed the ability to just FEEL the soul, then I'm sorry. I can't explain it to you.
(Not that one is better than the other. I'm sure you appreciate technicalities in music that I never will. But you may want to recognize that it's apparently a trade-off.)
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
My music appreciation can beat up your music appreciation.
Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
My music appreciation gets beaten up three times before I can even get out of bed in the morning.
(Launchywiggin: )
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
Launchywiggin. Please donlt feel bad for what you said. If I am feeling vulnerable enough to put my son;s work for all to see then I would of course expect people not to necessarily like it.
He knows that the blues is easiest for him. If you link to a couple of the other vids, he is playing some of his own music, arranged by him.
But he would agree with you on my rather mystic approach to his music. After he played a song with Donna the Buffalo(there was absolutely no warning), I asked him how he had made this absolutely beautiful riff with the lead guitarist. He said, "I don't know." I said that, well, I thought it was freaky. His response was, "What Mom, you think it's freaky that I played in thirds with Jeb?"
As for the Korean boy, what I recognize is a look of concentration and love of what he is doing. I would love to get them together, actually.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
OK. Is it the blues is easiest, or the blues are easiest?
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
This is the part of the song that I simply love. Go to the last three minutes to see the "freaky" playing in thirds.
Edit to add that Jeb Puryear is the lead singer/guitar player for Donna the Buffalo, my favorite band in the world. Jeb is also Aidan's hero. It would be like me, at ten, getting to play a song with Donny OSmond. (see, Orincoro, told ya I was old)
Posted by Tammy (Member # 4119) on :
Elizabeth, your son's adorable! I'd be proud!
Posted by Launchywiggin (Member # 9116) on :
I would say "the blues are" wonderful to listen to, instead of "is".
After watching more of Aidan's videos, I think I'm mostly just jealous that I'm not as brave as he is to get up and play in front of so many people (and his own stuff! I never played my compositions for anyone else). It's clear he's worked, studied, and practiced to gain the amazing talent he has now. I only started playing when I was his age, so he's a lucky kid to have parents that support him so young.
About soul, Kq, it's definitely not absent in my understanding of music. We probably just see it differently. Instead of treating it as undefinable ("it's got soul" doesn't explain anything about the music), I try to understand why some pieces of music/recordings are so much more moving than others, rather than attributing it to some unknown variable. Technical training/understanding definitely doesn't remove the ability to feel the "soul"--if anything--it gives me a much greater range of things to explore, appreciate, and "feel" about the music than if I were just experiencing it at face value. If all you see is the tip of the iceberg, than whatever is under it can only be explained using words like "soul". Being able to define what's under there doesn't take the soul away, it makes it more clear, if anything.
There is a trade-off, though--in that it's harder to appreciate music with nothing "under the water". You become more discerning in what has "soul" and what doesn't.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
I guess, for me, it is not so much a soul thing as a "music coming through" thing. Some people seem to be playing the music, and they may or may not play it with "soul." Sometimes, though, I swear someone is channeling. They are just so in tune with the music, as if it is coming through them more than they are making it.
Again, I know that is vague and mystic, but it is how I feel about some musicians.
I can listen to Bela Fleck play his banjo for about two songs, and then boredom hits. But when I hear Richie Stearns play, it hits me right in the heart.
I feel the same about music as I do about literature. Please don't tell me what's good. If I like it, I think it's good. I am not in it for the analysis, I did that in college.
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
Launchy, I disagree-- soul is by definition undefineable. Understanding why something is emotionally moving is not the same as whether something has soul or not. I guess my idea is somewhere between yours and Elizabeth's. But that's okay, I'm happy to disagree, and let it go. Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by ElJay: Orincoro and Launchywiggin, I'm not sure you both realize that "the kid playing the blues guitar" that Elizabeth posted is her son, Aidan, not some random kid she found on YouTube.
Not to sound snarky, but I wonder i'm not sure you know I haven't really said anything about that.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: It's worth noting, BTW, that my brother is a music composition major. I consider it the worst possible thing to happen to his ability to actually compose listenable music -- which is, as far as I'm concerned, the only kind of music worth producing.
Well that's just like... your opinion, man.
quote: He's spent the last two years researching an obscure East European immigrant who died in obscurity in New York after writing a few piano pieces that are so deliberately dissonant that they go through dissonance and come out the other side. Andy's an astonishingly talented pianist, but there's no way to tell from what he's been playing lately; the pieces are of enormous technical difficulty, but they're so mind-gratingly awful to listen to, so deliberately horrible, that the only way to suppose he's played a wrong note is if something briefly sounds okay.
If you're talking about Bartok (my accenty button is not working) then man are you wrong.
If it is Bartok, there are a gazilion Bartok pieces that are breathtakingly creative. They are stark, harsh at times, sometimes frightening, sometimes grating. I took a class myself on his string quartets and concerto for orchestra, plus his "Music for String Percussion and Celeste," and it's revealing of a brilliant intellect and a careful attention to the finest detail. It's music that teaches musicians what they are capable of when they don't even know it.
If you don't like it, well, I sympathize. But the idea that your brother lost some ability to compose beautiful music in a composition program is a) wrong, b) entirely missing the point c) insulting.
So there ya go. You're the snob, thinking that what you don't like is totally lacking in validity. I at least acknowledged a good deal of personal thought that has gone into my feelings about Pachelbel. You've just turned your cereal bowl over like a kid because you don't like the taste of raisin bran.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by ketchupqueen: (Not that one is better than the other. I'm sure you appreciate technicalities in music that I never will. But you may want to recognize that it's apparently a trade-off.)
This is as close as people on Hatrack come to outright bigotry. You're much nicer a person than these words suggest. I can't tell you though, how frustrating and deeply insulting a comment like that can be.
You're talking to people who are dedicating their lives to music. Do you really think it doesn't have a spiritual aspect to us? I think if anything, I frown on those kinds of aphorisms and vagaries because they dismiss an element of my life that is so deeply spiritual as "unknowable." That idea is discouraging to someone who spends so much time looking for answers and questions in music. To have you turn around and say that that hard work is meaningless? Do you think an architect doesn't really enjoy being in buildings? Not as much as you do? How could you know that?
quote: Posted by LW: There is a trade-off, though--in that it's harder to appreciate music with nothing "under the water". You become more discerning in what has "soul" and what doesn't.
You'd think that ours was a primitive culture afraid of knowledge and self-exploration....
oh what, it is. Please people, I know this all goes back to Adam eating the stupid fruit and losing the chance to spend an eternity frolicking disease-free in an orchard with eve. What he got in return was A LIFE. A life of changes and questions and independence, in the story you may believe in, from God. The moral is, at least to me, that we will always be children who are afraid that growing will hurt us, and believe that false impressions and half-images of the world will satisfy us all our lives.
Knowing something doesn't hurt you.
But it does make the tribes people jealous. So let's stop treating academic knowledge like the mark of Satan please, and let's all decide whether there is any aspect of our lives in which we would truly choose to KNOW LESS.
Posted by ElJay (Member # 6358) on :
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro:
quote:Originally posted by ElJay: Orincoro and Launchywiggin, I'm not sure you both realize that "the kid playing the blues guitar" that Elizabeth posted is her son, Aidan, not some random kid she found on YouTube.
Not to sound snarky, but I wonder i'm not sure you know I haven't really said anything about that.
Actually, I am aware of that. I read through your posts very carefully before I posted. And while you haven't specifically said anything about Elizabeth's video, there are places that you're vague enough about what you're talking about that it could be interpreted as a slam on Aidan to someone reading fast, just like someone reading fast could miss the fact that Aidan is Elizabeth's son. So I thought that perhaps if you were aware of that fact, you might be a bit more careful in your phrasing.
Silly of me, I know, to think you'd care, since you seem to be going out of your way to be as dislikable as possible in this thread.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
quote:But the idea that your brother lost some ability to compose beautiful music in a composition program is a) wrong, b) entirely missing the point c) insulting.
You'd have to know Tom's brother to be able to make this statement with any authority, Orincoro.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by ElJay:
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro:
quote:Originally posted by ElJay: Orincoro and Launchywiggin, I'm not sure you both realize that "the kid playing the blues guitar" that Elizabeth posted is her son, Aidan, not some random kid she found on YouTube.
Not to sound snarky, but I wonder i'm not sure you know I haven't really said anything about that.
Actually, I am aware of that. I read through your posts very carefully before I posted. And while you haven't specifically said anything about Elizabeth's video, there are places that you're vague enough about what you're talking about that it could be interpreted as a slam on Aidan to someone reading fast, just like someone reading fast could miss the fact that Aidan is Elizabeth's son. So I thought that perhaps if you were aware of that fact, you might be a bit more careful in your phrasing.
Silly of me, I know, to think you'd care, since you seem to be going out of your way to be as dislikable as possible in this thread.
If I were really going out of my way, I'd watch the video you're talking about. But I haven't. I have know way of knowing what's in it- other than watching it, which I doubt I'll do.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by Scott R:
quote:But the idea that your brother lost some ability to compose beautiful music in a composition program is a) wrong, b) entirely missing the point c) insulting.
You'd have to know Tom's brother to be able to make this statement with any authority, Orincoro.
Tom offers his own opinions about his brother as evidence in favor of his own views. I have a right to question the validity of his statement from my own experience. My only authority is my experience, and that experience tells me that he is wrong.
Besides, really, unless the composition program we're talking about actually caused his brother some kind of specific brain damage I'm not aware of, Tom's comment seems to be aimed at suggesting that his brother's experience is the common one, or a likely one.
I have a right to say that this idea in general is wrong, beside the point, and insulting. And specifically to do with his brother, I can say with confidence also that Tom is wrong. Even if his brother had been the one to suggest that this has happened, which I imagine to be the likely retort, (hatrack loves setting people up this way), I still think he'd be wrong.
Anyway, Tom's comments on his brother's work showed a pretty obvious lack of understanding, interest or patience with his brother, and taking that into consideration, I am even more convinced that he is mistaken.
Like OSC's past comments on students who's artistic souls are "crushed" by the academic music machine... they reveal a great deal of ignorance, fear, and pettiness. Plain ignorance, really, that's all it is. An image of a world that does not exist, full of scary monsters who have no teeth. I'm continually, and in new and exciting ways, shocked at the attitudes people are willing to admit online, knowing that I have seen their real life expressions mirrored hundreds of times by people who are unwillingly to believe that something they do not understand has any merit.
I do thank you for being willing to talk and listen, but understand where the frustration comes from, and how it is sometimes easily evoked. Stereotypes in all forms can hurt real people who fight against them. I'm not a minority, I don't have a disability, but people make the wrong assumptions about me all the time- and I can see it happening to others. I don't hesitate to make assumptions, but I try to be right whenever I do- and I learn each time I'm wrong.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
quote:I have a right to question the validity of his statement from my own experience. My only authority is my experience, and that experience tells me that he is wrong.
I read Tom's comments as being specifically about his brother. Do you have any experience with Tom's brother? If you do not, then you cannot talk intelligently on whether Tom's brother's musical capability has been weakened or strengthened by an academic composition program.
You may say, "My own musical taste has been broadened by my composition program. I feel like most of the students I know have had their musical capacity increased by their composition program."
But unless you know Tom's brother, you cannot presume to speak about his musical capabilities, and expect us to take your word over Tom's.
Also, remember that a bunch of us on Hatrack fall under the umbrella "academic intellectuals."
You are being requested to refine the tone of your posts, and you've admitted that you are being a jerk. Asking you to change your behavior is not the same as persecuting you.
Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :
quote:You're the snob, thinking that what you don't like is totally lacking in validity.
No, you're still a snob. Maybe Tom's a snob too, but you're just saying "I know you are, but what am I?" here.
quote:This is as close as people on Hatrack come to outright bigotry.
This is false. People on Hatrack have gone well into "outright bigotry," and what KQ said doesn't even begin to approach the level of some of the slurs that have been used on this forum, since what she said isn't even a slur. She gave her opinion. It's an opinion you find insulting, but then some people are finding your opinions insulting too, so you should consider coming down off that high horse.
I even agree with the point you make about music education not being a "trade-off," but you need to get over both your superiority and persecution complexes. I love and am fascinated by music and considered pursuing it academically at the university level; my parents were both academics, so I have none of the anti-academic bias you rail against; I ought to be very interested in reading your posts. I ought to thoroughly enjoy them. And yet, neither of those things is true, because of the tone you choose to take.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:You're the snob, thinking that what you don't like is totally lacking in validity.
This is an attitude you've displayed here before - including in this thread.
Posted by Primal Curve (Member # 3587) on :
<plays "Mary Had a Little Lamb", with soul>
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
It's always fun when people assert that something like music or cooking can be quantifiably judged, at least judged as to how much it should be enjoyed.
They can be quantifiably judged as to how difficult and technically well-executed they are, but seriously, who gives a damn about that? Only (some) of the people in the academic field of music.
Here's an assumption you appear to have taken to heart which you should reconsider: your opinions on musical issues are somehow more worthwhile than anyone else's, because of your training.
Music isn't science, at least not how people actually experience it. Not science like physics or biology or engineering.
Right now you're a minority of just about one around here. Ask yourself which is more likely: that (just about) everyone else is being unfair to you, or that you're inviting criticism by your behavior?
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote: If you're talking about Bartok (my accenty button is not working) then man are you wrong.
I'm not talking about Bartok. Bartok did not die in obscurity.
------
My brother used to have a strong knack for simple harmony, and a good ear for a catchy, unique melody. I would find myself humming the things he'd put together, and I don't generally hum stuff.
Nowadays he spends seven months writing something that is deliberately unmemorable, calculating the wavelengths of a given interval so that he can express a waveform as part of a larger symbol that might be addressed in a later movement. When he attempts to write something actually worth listening to, however, he is crippled by his desire to make his music "artful."
I have no doubt that he will someday overcome this, but it makes everything he writes at the moment unpleasant to experience. If he intends to make a living as a songwriter or teacher -- and he does -- he will need to get over the "art" he is currently being taught.
Posted by orlox (Member # 2392) on :
25 minute mp3 of Radiolab on music. Interesting discussion of consonance and dissonance at 11:00 min.
You know, in retrospect, I don't mind the dissonance as much as I mind the atonality. Posted by Launchywiggin (Member # 9116) on :
Originally posted by Rakeesh:
quote:They can be quantifiably judged as to how difficult and technically well-executed they are, but seriously, who gives a damn about that? Only (some) of the people in the academic field of music.
EVERYONE cares about how well executed music is. Not just academics. Because it's not just notes that go into execution, it's dynamics, phrasing, artistry--even "soul". Everyone also judges music as much as any academic. Not everyone can explain WHY they like what they like, though--that takes an understanding of the theory behind it.
I don't think Orincoro is asserting that his opinion is more "worthwhile" than anyone else's--but it DOES have more perspective and information--because we have music degrees.
The science of how people experience music is called "Psychoacoustics"--and if you listen to orlox's link, you'll find that your assertion is dead wrong.
And consider Orincoro's minority of 2 in a crowd of 12 posters--not that awful. While I'd probably use more tact than he does in regards to tone, I don't disagree with anything he's said.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
quote:EVERYONE cares about how well executed music is. Not just academics. Because it's not just notes that go into execution, it's dynamics, phrasing, artistry--even "soul". Everyone also judges music as much as any academic. Not everyone can explain WHY they like what they like, though--that takes an understanding of the theory behind it.
Yes, but very few people think of it that way. And certainly not to the extent and in the ways that people with music degrees do. And no, the casual listener does not judge music to the extent an academic does.
quote:And consider Orincoro's minority of 2 in a crowd of 12 posters--not that awful. While I'd probably use more tact than he does in regards to tone, I don't disagree with anything he's said.
This is about tone, mostly, so I don't really get your point.
quote:I don't think Orincoro is asserting that his opinion is more "worthwhile" than anyone else's--but it DOES have more perspective and information--because we have music degrees.
You must be reading different posts than I am, then.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by Launchywiggin: I don't think Orincoro is asserting that his opinion is more "worthwhile" than anyone else's
He has repeatedly. And exceedingly rudely.
I don't accept an English major's claim that they can tell me what books I should like either.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
quote:I don't accept an English major's claim that they can tell me what books I should like either.
But they have degrees!
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
So I should freeze them?
Posted by Launchywiggin (Member # 9116) on :
Snubbing the academics seems, to me, to be the same crime as academics snubbing the popular.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
Not when they do the snubbing first, and not when we're being silly about it:)
Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :
quote:Originally posted by Launchywiggin: Not everyone can explain WHY they like what they like, though--that takes an understanding of the theory behind it.
I agree with this to an extent. I'm not sure it can help me understand why I prefer some distorted guitar textures over others, for example.
I could be wrong about that, though.
Posted by Launchywiggin (Member # 9116) on :
One of the main reasons I majored in music was that I wanted to figure out why people like what they like--why some chord progressions really are timeless (at least to our Western ears)--and others are difficult to listen to. Listening to how popular music has changed from the medieval period to today really opened my eyes to how our ears (and brains) have developed and changed what is "likable" and what isn't over time. (This is especially applicable to the discussion about Tom's brother, because what he's doing might very well be changing how society hears music in the future)--Just think about how much our preferences change in our own lifetimes!
Personal preferences (like distorted guitar texture) change from person to person based on their personal aesthetic (what they find important in music and everything else in life). In order to be able to identify that you like "distorted guitar texture" instead of just being able to say "I like THAT--it sure sounds cool"--that took a certain amount of education in musical vocabulary and ideas. Now if you studied it further, you'd be able to find out what specifically ABOUT distorted guitar textures appeals to you.
That's essentially what music majoring did for me--it allowed me to be able to identify all the little occurrences and subtleties that make up all music, so that instead of just enjoying the overall picture from a distance, I can enjoy every little bit of it from under a microscope.
Posted by camus (Member # 8052) on :
quote:EVERYONE cares about how well executed music is.
Not all well executed music sounds good, and not all good sounding music is well executed. Most of the time I don't particularly care about the subtleties of execution as long as it manages to sound good to me.
Posted by Olivet (Member # 1104) on :
I wonder if psychoacoustics is responsible for the thing that every Pink Floyd song I've ever heard does to me. As a kid I could tell if a song was Pink Floyd or not by how crazy I felt after 30 seconds or slightly less.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
Olive, Radiohead does that to me for some reason. I am assuming it was not a good crazy?
Posted by Launchywiggin (Member # 9116) on :
quote:Not all well executed music sounds good, and not all good sounding music is well executed. Most of the time I don't particularly care about the subtleties of execution as long as it manages to sound good to me.
You may not care about perfection, but you care that the music is executed well enough that it sounds good. Poorly executed music may sound good, but it sounds better if it isn't poorly executed. I'm not talking about personal preference in what kind of music you like or don't like, but that you care about the execution of what you do like.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
I have a degree in music ( )and:
In my opinion, different music is properaly evaluated different ways. The criteria for judging a Mozart symphony is different from that of a folk song. What combination of technique, interpretation, soul or what-have-you is appropriate to the piece, the circumstance, the venue, the listener. I know brilliant musicians who have stunning technique but can't read a note. There are folk singers that can't even hold pitch, yet are national treasures.
In my opinion, music is far too diverse an art for any "expert" to be making general value judgments.
Posted by Launchywiggin (Member # 9116) on :
Psychoacoustics tries to explain how our brain perceives and interprets sound in general--and it gets much deeper when you look into the psychology of music, which is also a study of culture. I only took one class on it, (and it was a while ago), but I enjoyed it immensely--especially the parts about music's relationship with memory (something OSC touched on in one of his recent articles).
Also, I agree with what you just said, KM. Why the eyeroll?
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
Orincoro wrote: "If I were really going out of my way, I'd watch the video you're talking about. But I haven't. I have know way of knowing what's in it- other than watching it, which I doubt I'll do."
I am trying very hard to make sense of this, but I just can't do it.
Are you afraid I will be angry if you don't like my(then) ten year-old's music? Are you being stubborn and just digging in your heels? Honestly, I don't get it.
Posted by mackillian (Member # 586) on :
quote:So I should freeze them?
No!
Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :
quote:Originally posted by Launchywiggin: In order to be able to identify that you like "distorted guitar texture" instead of just being able to say "I like THAT--it sure sounds cool"--that took a certain amount of education in musical vocabulary and ideas. Now if you studied it further, you'd be able to find out what specifically ABOUT distorted guitar textures appeals to you.
Just a point of clarification, it isn't that I like all distorted guitar textures, it's specifically that I like some distorted guitar textures in particular over others. Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: [QUOTE] Nowadays he spends seven months writing something that is deliberately unmemorable, calculating the wavelengths of a given interval so that he can express a waveform as part of a larger symbol that might be addressed in a later movement. When he attempts to write something actually worth listening to, however, he is crippled by his desire to make his music "artful."
I have no doubt that he will someday overcome this, but it makes everything he writes at the moment unpleasant to experience. If he intends to make a living as a songwriter or teacher -- and he does -- he will need to get over the "art" he is currently being taught.
This simply doesn't match my experience. It's of course possible that you're brother is misguided, maybe he is poorly taught, maybe he is involved in a program that is not helping him to establish a useful artistic process. The things you talk about him doing shouldn't be taking him months to do anyway- if he studies music programming and sequencing, for instance in MAX/MSP or PD, he should be learning languages that increase his musical versatility and the accessability of his work to his own artistic intentions. And maybe he's not really a very good artist- I can't know that.
I can tell you that we write music for many different reasons, and some of the music of the 20th century is very deeply concerned with being inaccessible. Composers who chose this route did so for valid reasons, they were concerned with the nature of music and the effects that the public ear was having on art in general. For me that period is interesting but possibly regrettable.
That is not the current prevailing culture, in my opinion. And I still think your perception of your brother's work is going to be too biased for you to present it as a valid assessment, much less a representative example as you are trying to do.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by camus:
quote:EVERYONE cares about how well executed music is.
Not all well executed music sounds good, and not all good sounding music is well executed. Most of the time I don't particularly care about the subtleties of execution as long as it manages to sound good to me.
I'm reminded of a brilliant recording of an ostensibly non-singer performing "Oh holy night." Someone please post a link if you have any idea what I mean, I can't find the thing myself at the moment (low battery).
The performance is the epitomy of poor execution. It's unmusical, uncomfortable, ugly, and hilarious. The funny thing is that I am absolutely convinced that the person who recorded it is brilliant musically. What seems like poor execution is, in the end, highly effective. Why do people love the Beatles to death even though alot of their music is technically quite rough? The roughness in it is part of their sound, and it works, it's GOOD execution. The ultimate judge is how effective the music can be, and how lasting. I would argue that if you really enjoy something, its execution is good by definition. If you dislike it musically but still appreciate the execution for some reason, then it's also well executed.
How does this apply to the recording we're talking about? In my opinion the piece is not well executed, it is annoying, it is tiresome, and it is insincere. I don't think it's good, but considering alot of the people here like it, I would concede that its execution has been effective in that way. I hold however, that this appeal is bought at the price of taste, and this price ultimately defeats the piece for me, and quickly. So there is wiggle room here, but I think my view is borne out when one explores the repertoire further, and reflects on the piece again- they will find it to be artistically bereft.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
Oh Holy Night.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:I hold however, that this appeal is bought at the price of taste, and this price ultimately defeats the piece for me, and quickly.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
(to Orincoro) Now you are saying what many people have been saying, that musical taste is subjective. And you are stating your dislike of this child's performance as your opinion, not The Truth.
You have epicurean taste in music. Your palate does not allow for the country style macaroni and cheese. You want fondue.
Posted by erosomniac (Member # 6834) on :
That's because macaroni & cheese is disgusting, and fondue is delicious!
Unless the macaroni and cheese is made with gruyere, fontina and cheddar, in which case it's basically like good fondue anyway. Plus noodles. And who doesn't like noodles? No one worth knowing, that's for sure.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:That's because macaroni & cheese is disgusting, and fondue is delicious!
You've been eating the wrong kind of macaroni and cheese.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head:
quote:I hold however, that this appeal is bought at the price of taste, and this price ultimately defeats the piece for me, and quickly.
Hey thanks for weighing in.
Posted by erosomniac (Member # 6834) on :
People always say that...nope, sorry, they're wrong! Macaroni & cheese is for uncultured swine whose tastebuds probably studied business.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
You snob! You probably put the butter in the fridge, instead of on the counter where it belongs. Or worse, you don't use butter, you use...olive oil.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by Elizabeth: (to Orincoro) Now you are saying what many people have been saying, that musical taste is subjective. And you are stating your dislike of this child's performance as your opinion, not The Truth.
You have epicurean taste in music. Your palate does not allow for the country style macaroni and cheese. You want fondue.
I would say I recognize why macaroni is enjoyable to some people. Those people are mostly children... but macoroni doesn't make a healthy diet. Eating it all the time makes you fat and lazy, and it serves a crutch when you could be expanding your palette.
I still don't think that's a subjective judgement- scientists have pretty effectively proven that some things are more healthy for your body than others, and I would like people to consider that some things in music are macaroni, and some are sushi. Kids also hate sushi because it's "yucky fish," but grown ups develop a taste for it.
Besides ultimately it would be deeply silly for me to believe in my heart of hearts that I possess "The Truth." But I feel I use judgment that should be accessible to anyone, I just require that people have reasons for thinking what they do. What I'm pretty consistently presented with in topics like this one, are stupid reasons.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
Good point! I hate sushi.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
And Elizabeth, I'm not going to watch your son's video, at least in this topic, because I don't think it fits with the discussion to involve someone you know, mixing your understandably personal feelings in- I couldn't be fair to myself or you if I did talk about it. When it's someone who will be affected by what you say, and you have the potential of discouraging them from trying to do well, then you have to be more careful.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by Elizabeth: Olive, Radiohead does that to me for some reason. I am assuming it was not a good crazy?
Radiohead is one of the more psycho acoustically adventurous bands. If you've seen "There will be Blood," Johnny Greenwood, who started out as Radiohead's lead guitarist, is the composer of the original material on the soundtrack. The music he generated for the movie is deeply effective on that level of "I think I'm as crazy as the movie." It's wonderfully involving that way.
If you listen to "In Rainbows," which I highly recommend, you'll kind of see how a persistent tone and aesthetic sense is presented through the first disk (the free one). If you want to hear a really obvious example of psychoacoustic manipulation, listen to the last track "Videotape," and pay attention to the ambient sound on the track, and how tense and taught the music is because of it. Imagine how it would sound without the interference and semi-transparent dissonance of the two sound objects, the piano and the background, and you'll see how four dimensional the music becomes as they interact. This really sets Radiohead apart in popular music- even more than the Beatles.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:I would say I recognize why macaroni is enjoyable to some people. Those people are mostly children...
Your ignorance is showing.
quote:but macoroni doesn't make a healthy diet. Eating it all the time makes you fat and lazy, and it serves a crutch when you could be expanding your palette.
And eating fondue all the time does what, exactly? Moreover, basing a food's impact on what happens when it's eaten all the time is a ridiculous way to look at the issue.
quote:I still don't think that's a subjective judgement- scientists have pretty effectively proven that some things are more healthy for your body than others, and I would like people to consider that some things in music are macaroni, and some are sushi. Kids also hate sushi because it's "yucky fish," but grown ups develop a taste for it.
Again - we're comparing to fondue here, not sushi, and we're comparing taste, not healthfulness.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dagonee:
quote:I still don't think that's a subjective judgement- scientists have pretty effectively proven that some things are more healthy for your body than others, and I would like people to consider that some things in music are macaroni, and some are sushi. Kids also hate sushi because it's "yucky fish," but grown ups develop a taste for it.
Again - we're comparing to fondue here, not sushi, and we're comparing taste, not healthfulness.
I don't like the fondue analogy, that's why I suggested sushi. And I believe that musical "taste" is related to healthful eating. It's a twisted set of metaphors, but please don't hold me responsible for something I didn't say.
It was Elizabeth who said fondue, I countered with sushi. My point is that I think "taste" in music is similar to taste in healthy eating. That is not to compare the word "taste" in music with the word "taste" as in "this tastes sweet."
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:This is especially applicable to the discussion about Tom's brother, because what he's doing might very well be changing how society hears music in the future
God, I hope not.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
And my kids love sushi.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
Yeah, God forbid we should ever evolve. I feel bad for your brother. He probably senses your disgust with his work the way I do with my dad. And my music is described by a lot of people as being very pretty. It's unfortunate and discouraging to have family members unwilling to be supportive.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
Your version of the analogy sucks, too.
First, eating sushi all the time isn't particularly healthful, either. Second, there's no particular reason why someone has to stop liking macaroni and cheese when they start liking sushi. Third, there are plenty of macaroni and cheeses that kids don't prefer. Fourth, it's still based on a mistaken assumption about macaroni and cheese and who likes it.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:He probably senses your disgust with his work the way I do with my dad.
So that's where you get it from.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro: My point is that I think "taste" in music is similar to taste in healthy eating.
Tell us again how you're not a snob?
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
Dag you haven't offered a single substantive element into this discussion as far as I can recall. Apparently your wheelhouse extends only far enough to lazily snipe at me without demonstrating any will to form your own alternative suggestions. I hope you enjoy it.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:God forbid we should ever evolve.
I think the observation that tastes evolve is of course perfectly valid. I think it's even inevitable. This does not mean, however, that I would want the kind of music my brother is currently composing to become popular at any point within my lifetime.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:Dag you haven't offered a single substantive element into this discussion as far as I can recall. Apparently your wheelhouse extends only far enough to lazily snipe at me without demonstrating any will to form your own alternative suggestions. I hope you enjoy it.
I substantively addressed your analogy. How exactly is that not an alternative suggestion?
It seems all you can do is bitch about the fact that I disagree with you rather than actually address the substance of the disagreement.
Perhaps you can explain how my addressing of the food analogy - to which YOU responded to ME first, remember - is somehow "lazier" than yours.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dagonee:
quote:He probably senses your disgust with his work the way I do with my dad.
So that's where you get it from.
My dad has suffered several strokes over the past 8 years, and his personality has altered significantly in that time. He's become rigid, unknowable, withdrawn, and unhappy. So I'd thank you to be sensitive if I reveal that this a source of a lot of worry in the family and tension between myself and my dad. It's possible I object to your tone so often because you sound a lot like him (both lawyers too) and I apologize for that. But I hope you won't find my relationship with my dad to be an irresistible target for your comments- it's a sensitive area.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
I'm sorry for your dad's medical problems.
However, my comment was meant to reflect that it is very easy to sense your disgust concerning other people's tastes. Perhaps you could remember how it feels before expressing that disgust.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
That's fair.
Posted by imogen (Member # 5485) on :
Orinoco, I'm sorry about your Dad.
However you brought him up and Dag (and no-one on this thread) had any way of knowing what you've just revealed.
Edit - beaten to it.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
I had mentioned it before in other places, but yes you're right- I mention it now.
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
I would like to submit one thing I think we can all agree on. That is that
Metal Machine Music by Lou Reed is impossible to listen to in one sitting. While this may not be the worst piece of "music" ever written (if it was indeed "written") it does serve as a sign-post we can all point to in order to say that, differing tastes aside, anything past this line is just plain "bad."
Now, here's the point (you knew there had to be one, didn't you), I submit that there is no way to similar stick a flag in the ground at the opposite end of the spectrum. That is, you can't say "anything beyond this point is "good" (unless, of course, you use Lou Reed's Metal Machine Music as the one and only dividing line and simply assert that anything short of MMM is at least not as bad as that, and therefor "good" for some value of good).
Now, can we all just relax to some PDQ Bach?
You music majors can appreciate all the inside technical jokes.
The rest of us will laugh at the funny noises.
It's all good.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
Bob, I will agree to your terms only if macaroni and cheese is served, made with butter that has been left out, and which does not touch any other food on the plate. I would also prefer the facilities to be stocked with toilet paper that rolls under, not over.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by mackillian:
quote:So I should freeze them?
No!
Wuss.
*bite*
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro: ... but macoroni doesn't make a healthy diet. Eating it all the time makes you fat and lazy, and it serves a crutch when you could be expanding your palette.
I still don't think that's a subjective judgement- scientists have pretty effectively proven that some things are more healthy for your body than others, and I would like people to consider that some things in music are macaroni, and some are sushi. Kids also hate sushi because it's "yucky fish," but grown ups develop a taste for it.
The food metaphor is not a very good one. You're essentially conflating two different things. True, scientists have discovered that some foods are healthier than others (in certain contexts BTW, not as an absolute). However, this kind of analysis can be based on quantifiable and scientifically verifiable procedure which can be replicated across cultures, since we're really basing our analysis on concrete molecules such as carbohydrates, saturated fats, proteins, etc.
The problem is when you conflate the idea of scientific "healthiness" with the idea of human taste and then relate that to musical taste. Those are two non-trivial leaps.
Musical taste as you have described is not scientific, is not quantifiable, and is not even really cross-culturally applicable. There are some aspects to what other people have responded to that may be, TomDavidson's anecdote about his brother experimenting with waveforms, but even then his judgement was based on fundamentally subjective grounds, "it does not sound good."
Thus, I believe that at least some of the frustration in this thread comes from your blanket proclamations "this is good" or more often "this is bad/cheap/bad taste" and then backing up those rather subjective statements with the claim that with a music degree, you're more qualified to make that kind of judgement.
Well, a music degree doesn't really give you the same type of expertise when judging music that a doctor can draw upon when assessing the healthiness of a certain piece of food. Music is art, usually not a social science, and certainly not a real science. Pretending like it is and that you're tapping into concrete measures of taste is not really going to help the perception of well ... "snobbiness" Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
you mean a metaphor conflates two ideas in order to make a point? Oh man, I need to take a good long hard look in the mirror.
Just because you don't understand what about music is quantifiable doesn't mean it isn't there. I an LW agree pretty strongly on why this isn't, and we've sighted pretty concrete reasons, i.e. It's derivative, the playing is dynamically static (don't know if I did say that), the scales are unoriginal and by-the-book, the arrangement is uninteresting, the sound is unrefined, and to add a further observation, the sound of the guitar is very flat and unappealing- I know very concrete and executable ways of making it better- I could make it better, in a limited way, in about 5 minutes in Logic. That wouldn't change all the other fatal flaws, and it's overall lack of interest.
Really, it's such a silly and obvious example of a generic nothing. I'd be buoyed a bit more if there was even a question in my mind about it.
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
Mucus, I don't like the implication that social science is not "real science," but otherwise I agree with everything you've written in that post.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
Mucus, I've responded to that assertion not only in this thread but in many others, and I would imagine from you as well. So I don't have anything else to add. You want to dismiss my view of it without showing an actual understanding of that view- that doesn't hurt me very much.
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
Out of curiosity, is there a phrasing for the distinction that you find unoffensive, Bob, or do you disagree with the entire distinction between sciences such as chemistry and physics and sciences such as sociology and psychology? (Not trying to be offensive here, it's a genuine question.)
(If there is a distinction, where do biology and anatomy fall within it? Climate science?)
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
"Soft sciences" is the term I'm used to. (With physics, chemistry, etc. thus called "hard sciences.")
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:I could make it better, in a limited way, in about 5 minutes in Logic.
Do it.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
Thanks, Launchywiggin.
The eyeroll was an indication of how silly I felt it was to list my "credentials" before participating in a conversation about musical tastes.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
Bob_Scopatz & Rivka: Sorry, soft/hard science rather than social/real if you prefer. Actually, I think its better because it captures the idea of differing degrees of absoluteness (can't think of a better word) and differing use of concepts like the scientific method, rather than a more binary view that I accidentally implied.
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro: Just because you don't understand what about music is quantifiable doesn't mean it isn't there. I an LW agree pretty strongly on why this isn't, and we've sighted pretty concrete reasons, i.e. It's derivative, the playing is dynamically static (don't know if I did say that), the scales are unoriginal and by-the-book, the arrangement is uninteresting, the sound is unrefined, and to add a further observation, the sound of the guitar is very flat and unappealing ...
Obviously we have very different ideas about what the word "quantifiable" means. What is the unit of "originality"? How do you measure "interest" in a way that is reproducible for someone in a different culture? What does the SI have to say about the measurement of "refinement" or "appeal"?
These are very qualitative and subjective judgements, not quantitative.
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
I'd go for "soft" and "hard" as terminology for lack of a better one.
(and isn't that just what's needed at the top of a page in this thread?)
I believe Biology and Astronomy would qualify as "hard" sciences because, at least according to the US tax code (at the time I went to grad school, at least, the IRS had different rules for taxing stipends depending on whether you were in a hard or soft science), the dividing line between hard and soft is somewhere smack in the middle of the larger field of "Psychology". Experimental and Cognitive Psych are "hard" sciences, "Social" and "Clinical" Psych are "soft" sciences.
So...Mucus, no problem really. I figured I knew what you meant.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mucus: Bob_Scopatz & Rivka: Sorry, soft/hard science rather than social/real if you prefer.
Don't apologize. I majored in a real science. Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
quote:Originally posted by rivka:
quote:Originally posted by Mucus: Bob_Scopatz & Rivka: Sorry, soft/hard science rather than social/real if you prefer.
Don't apologize. I majored in a real science.
(and she uses that knowledge only for good!)
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
O:)
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
(she made me say that!)
<runs & hides>
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson:
quote:I could make it better, in a limited way, in about 5 minutes in Logic.
Do it.
I don't own it, so no. Realizing that sounds weak, but no.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by rivka:
quote:Originally posted by Mucus: Bob_Scopatz & Rivka: Sorry, soft/hard science rather than social/real if you prefer.
quote:Originally posted by Elizabeth: Olive, Radiohead does that to me for some reason. I am assuming it was not a good crazy?
Really? I kind of like what little Radiohead I've heard. But, yeah, not a good crazy. It makes my heart beat fast and (since I'm usually in a vehicle of some sort)it makes me want to claw at the windows and doors. Alternately, there are some of their songs without lyrics that put violent images in my head, and it feels like it would be fun to be violent. Scared the hell out of me the first time.
The nearest thing I've seen to describe it was probably the "Adam" episode of Torchwood, when Adam gave Ianto memories of killing women and enjoying it, even though he'd never done any such thing.
Pink Floyd resonates on the exact frequency of my crazy bone. O_O I have no idea how that works, but I avoid it.
Posted by Olivet (Member # 1104) on :
Oh, Bob! PDQ Bach! The only solo I ever performed with the KC Choir was in The Seasonings. Center stage and everything.
It was a sneeze. Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
Olive, Radiohead does not give me images of ciolence, more of a strange otherworld that I wouldn;t want to be in, like Coraline's Other Mother lives in.
We went to a Pink Floyd concert once, and it was the most violent and frightening concert experience I have ever had. There was a seething anger in the stadium, a man in front of us punched his girlfriend in the face, it was just awful.
But I love Pink Floyd, just not to listen to often.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
I'm also not a huge fan of live rock concerts- they verge too far towards mass hysteria for me. It isn't too appealing.
Radiohead though, especially In Rainbows, is a fantastic band to listen to while you're driving, sitting around, on your ipod. Their earlier music was much more insistent, but recently, and especially with this album, it's much more reflective and calm. I loves it.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
Radiohead is not my cup of tea. I heard the lead singer on NPR's 'All Songs Considered,' and I just didn't find it very appealing.
Electronica, in all its forms, just isn't appealing to me.
:shrug:
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
I heard one Radiohead song. It was dreadful.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by Scott R: Radiohead is not my cup of tea. I heard the lead singer on NPR's 'All Songs Considered,' and I just didn't find it very appealing.
Electronica, in all its forms, just isn't appealing to me.
:shrug:
You will find their older stuff is so different from their current stuff it's almost a different band...almost.
Think The Beatles' "Happiness is a Warm Gun" Vs "Obla Di Obla Da."
Posted by Olivet (Member # 1104) on :
Was "Creep" Radiohead? That's the only song I've heard that I know to be theirs, and I like it. "I'm a creep, I'm a weirdo..."
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade: [You will find their older stuff is so different from their current stuff it's almost a different band...almost.
Think The Beatles' "Happiness is a Warm Gun" Vs "Obla Di Obla Da."
You know that those are on the same album, right? Might be better to go with "Baby's in Black" and "I Want You (She's So Heavy)" or something.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro: And Elizabeth, I'm not going to watch your son's video, at least in this topic, because I don't think it fits with the discussion to involve someone you know, mixing your understandably personal feelings in- I couldn't be fair to myself or you if I did talk about it. When it's someone who will be affected by what you say, and you have the potential of discouraging them from trying to do well, then you have to be more careful.
Well, first of all, it is my son' guitar video, not mine. He is a very innocent eleven, one of those boys who will mature when they are twenty. I will not share comments with him. In fact, I shield him from positive comments, because he gets overwhelmed. But I save them, for later.
I just think, even though I am the mom, that he is phenomenal. He has skills, he has passion, and he loves what he is doing. So even if you say something negative, about his timing, his this, his that, I won't really care! Don't you see? I just want you to give it a listen!
It doesn't have to be that complicated.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by Olivet: Was "Creep" Radiohead? That's the only song I've heard that I know to be theirs, and I like it. "I'm a creep, I'm a weirdo..."
Yeah, their most commercial song. Also quite non-representative of their style. It was on their, iirc, second album, and they abhor the idea that it is so often chosen to represent them- but they have that luxury now. It's a very different band 12-15 years later.
Icky: I would suggest listening to maybe 5 more songs. It could be an acquired taste- I know I didn't always enjoy it. Now I think its the best band playing.
If I could suggest 5 songs to listen to as an introduction, though band is rangy, I will do that if you want to listen:
1. Kid A- from the Kid A album
2. Everything in it's Right Place- from Kid A
3. Paranoid Android- from Ok Computer
4. Packed Like Sardines in A Can- from Amnesiac
5. Reckoner from In Rainbows
Alternate: Listen to "Videotape" from In Rainbows, or "Exit Music for Film" from Ok computer for the softer, end of album radiohead feel- all the other songs I mentioned are headers or middlers.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by Scott R:
Electronica, in all its forms, just isn't appealing to me.
:shrug:
Ok but radiohead doesn't fall in with the "electronica" genre that well. I wouldn't use that term to describe it. "Progressive Rock" is a term used a lot for them. They are also minimalist over the last few albums.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:Now I think its the best band playing.
Whereas "Creep" is quite possibly the one Radiohead song I've ever liked. Posted by imogen (Member # 5485) on :
I don't like Kid A. (And I think we've had this out before here, between radiohead fans...)
But Tom - Karma Police? Paranoid Android? Great songs. (And it's quite obvious OK Computer is my favourite Radiohead album).
Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :
Creep is from Pablo Honey, which was Radiohead's first album.
Interesting picks, Orincoro. Aside from Reckoner, I wouldn't have picked those songs to introduce Icarus to Radiohead. If he were interested in hearing more, I'd probably suggest:
Planet Telex, from The Bends
Lucky, from OK Computer
Reckoner, from In Rainbows
How to Disappear Completely, from Kid A
Faust Arp, from the Com Lag EP
Of course, my favourite Radiohead album is still -- after all these years -- The Bends.
(Note: it's actually "Packd Like Sardines In A Crushd Tin Box," IIRC, though I disliked Amnesiac as a whole.)
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson:
quote:Now I think its the best band playing.
Whereas "Creep" is quite possibly the one Radiohead song I've ever liked.
Yeah, weird. Still a good song, but much too much early 90's nirvana for me.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
Twinky- your list is one of good songs, but they aren't a: representative of what I think of as the band's range, and b) all that attractive, at least to me.
Also your list doesn't represent much slow music.
also lucky is about the last song I'd recommend for a new listener, I don't even like it that much.
The fact that you dislike amnesiac is going to affect my sleep.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by imogen: I don't like Kid A. (And I think we've had this out before here, between radiohead fans...)
But Tom - Karma Police? Paranoid Android? Great songs. (And it's quite obvious OK Computer is my favourite Radiohead album).
Seriously though, the idea of not liking Kid A. I mean i guess it's conceivably possible.. but why go through life like that?
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:But Tom - Karma Police? Paranoid Android? Great songs.
No, they're meh songs.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
You're a meh song.
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
Your mom's a meh song.
Posted by mackillian (Member # 586) on :
Your face is a meh song.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
At least my face answers phone calls. Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
Thirty years from now, I'm confident that Radiohead will not be one of the bands people mention from this era. Except possibly the same way people talk about Rick Springfield nowadays.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by rivka: At least my face answers phone calls.
OOOOHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH SNAP!
Posted by Strider (Member # 1807) on :
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: Thirty years from now, I'm confident that Radiohead will not be one of the bands people mention from this era. Except possibly the same way people talk about Rick Springfield nowadays.
Tom, I've never disagreed with you more.
And in fact, I rarely disagree with you at all!
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: Thirty years from now, I'm confident that Radiohead will not be one of the bands people mention from this era. Except possibly the same way people talk about Rick Springfield nowadays.
Well I think you're wrong about that- but you have to consider that in 30 years it will be people my age talking about the music that they listened to when they were in their early 20s who will decide what to talk about, and I think you're a few years older- so the discussion you'll be having will be a different one anyway, imo. It's not really on your personal radar, but I assure it is for many people. I also think that considering that Radiohead is significantly more of a recording-oriented band, less image based, less merchandised, and less geared toward live performance, their music will have a lasting appeal to people who are looking at what makes the current artistic climate tick. What worked for the Beatles, in the long run, was their innovations in the studio, and now we pretty much dismiss the fact that they were a pop idol sensation, because they were able to rise past that short term appeal. I think, like them or not, Radiohead has a tremendous influence on the recording community (they certainly do in my music department for example, among teachers as well as students), and they've helped to popularize new creative applications for musicians both in-studio and live. Also they've had a major impact, imo, on the adoption of minimalist arrangement techniques that we're now seeing all over the place in popular music- including as a visible example, Justin Timberlake, who's really transformed his image as a musician by moving into a similar arena.
So, maybe Radiohead won't be Greenday in 30 years, maybe they'll just be The Clash, but they'll be in the discussion.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by Strider: And in fact, I rarely disagree with you at all!
Nor do I, which is why I'm thinking that Tom is right on his own terms, just wrong when it comes to the big picture.
Case and Point: I have no knowledge of the music of Rick Springfield, but I'm 23.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro:
quote:Originally posted by rivka: At least my face answers phone calls.
OOOOHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH SNAP!
O_o
Do you even know what that was about?
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
No, that was my stupid point. Plus I really wanted to say it. Just being silly.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
'k.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
psh, your face.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote: So, maybe Radiohead won't be Greenday in 30 years, maybe they'll just be The Clash
Are you suggesting that, in terms of fame and influence, Green Day > The Clash?
I like both bands, but I have trouble imagining Green Day being considered more influential.
Posted by Launchywiggin (Member # 9116) on :
Yeah, dude--what DO you mean about Radiohead in relation to Green Day/The Clash?
When I think of bands that will be remembered from the 90's, Nirvana and Radiohead are the first two that come to mind. I liken Radiohead to Pink Floyd, Nirvana to Led Zeppelin (in terms of comparing memorability of 70's bands)
And now that I think about it, which bands WILL be remembered from the 90's? Tastes have diversified so far in the digital music age--I don't think any one band will ever be as (synonymous?) as the Beatles, etc.
[ February 29, 2008, 09:37 AM: Message edited by: Launchywiggin ]
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
Well, Greenday has had something like 15 number one hits, I can't find numbers anywhere for that, but it's just my guess. The Clash had none.
Fame and influence, I'm suggesting, are two different things. Green Day is imminently more famous. It's also pretty easy to say that the Clash had a wider influence in the music community, especially since they were on the vanguard of their movement, whereas Greenday formed in the late 80's when punk was pretty well established- so much so that many other bands resented their fame because they were late comers.
So your original statement was that you didn't think we'd be talking about Radiohead in 30 years. I think we will, but I think it's likely to be a conversation similar to one we might have now about The Clash- one having to do with their influence on the genre rather than their fame.
At the same time, I don't really think you're fully aware of Radiohead's popularity- especially considering that they spend a fractional amount of money in advertising compared to foreign bands of similar stature in the U.S. U2's advertising schemes are diabolical, (are they a US band or not?) and Greenday, as an example, courts the mtv crowd when Radiohead generally eschews traditional marketing, and no longer even belongs to a label.
So the fact that Radiohead was popular enough among fans and the media to make a splash in the news and quite a bit of money and critical attention for an album they produced themselves, distributing through various labels, despite it having been nearly 7 years since their most recent release, is saying alot about them. That album went to number one in the UK and the US, and was the number one album in the world at its peak position, according to Media Traffic.
So, I tend to think you underestimate their popularity.
Posted by Launchywiggin (Member # 9116) on :
Ahhh. Yeah--that makes sense. I've found that Radiohead is extremely popular among other musicians, too. One thing I will recognize--is that I don't think they have memorable "hits". Their big "hits" are pretty easily forgotten in the stream of top 40 (Karma Police, Creep, High and Dry). Definitely not like the Beatles in that respect.
The Clash analogy makes a lot of sense now.
Posted by Bokonon (Member # 480) on :
quote:Originally posted by twinky: Creep is from Pablo Honey, which was Radiohead's first album.
Interesting picks, Orincoro. Aside from Reckoner, I wouldn't have picked those songs to introduce Icarus to Radiohead. If he were interested in hearing more, I'd probably suggest:
Planet Telex, from The Bends
Lucky, from OK Computer
Reckoner, from In Rainbows
How to Disappear Completely, from Kid A
Faust Arp, from the Com Lag EP
Of course, my favourite Radiohead album is still -- after all these years -- The Bends.
(Note: it's actually "Packd Like Sardines In A Crushd Tin Box," IIRC, though I disliked Amnesiac as a whole.)
I think Planet Telex is a bad choice from that album. For me, it's a little too inaccessible. I'd recommend something more like The Bends, Street Spirit, or Just.
-Bok
Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :
quote:Twinky- your list is one of good songs, but they aren't a: representative of what I think of as the band's range, and b) all that attractive, at least to me.
Your first point is certainly true, but I know a little bit about what kinds of music Icarus likes, and I suspect he'd find my list at least palatable. I'm thinking about my hypothetical audience, whereas you're thinking about the band.
Actually, come to think of it, I think I performed Lucky unplugged at a gathering last year, and he might have been in the room when I did that.
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: Thirty years from now, I'm confident that Radiohead will not be one of the bands people mention from this era.
I'm curious as to why you think this? Also, I'm curious as to what it is about Radiohead that you dislike -- or what it is they lack that makes you indifferent. I don't think you're under any obligation to like Radiohead, mind you, I'm just interested.
For that matter, I'm kind of curious to hear about some band you'd just love to share. I'm always looking out for new recommendations and I'm in an exploratory mood these days.
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro: I also think that considering that Radiohead is significantly more of a recording-oriented band, less image based, less merchandised, and less geared toward live performance...
I agree that they put a lot of care, effort, and nuance into their recordings, but that isn't really what endears them to me.
In fact, since seeing Radiohead live, I hardly ever listen to the album versions of Kid A or Amnesiac songs -- I listen to the live recordings of those songs that I have from the show I attended. I think Radiohead are an incredible live band and you've really sold them short in that regard -- presumably due to not having seen them live.
Idioteque is a great example. I liked the album version -- I liked Kid A -- but the live version was really remarkable. Very different, and I liked the changes. Admittedly, I don't know that I'd like the live version to be the studio version, but I'd love a well-recorded live EP with Idioteque on it, for example.
Posted by Bokonon (Member # 480) on :
I agree that Radiohead actually pulls it off live. It's a pretty amazing show.
-Bok
Posted by Tatiana (Member # 6776) on :
How cool that this is now a thread about Radiohead. I completely agree with those who say they're a great band and will have a lasting impact. It's very telling when all my musician friends rave about a band. It tells me that there's something real there that's good. That's what happened to me with Radiohead, then I listened and heard it for myself.
Since then, some time in the mid-90s, Radiohead has been a huge favorite of mine. They're always different and always good.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:At the same time, I don't really think you're fully aware of Radiohead's popularity...
No, I am. I just think they're popular with people who like pretentious things that suck. There are a lot of those people, mind you.
quote:Also, I'm curious as to what it is about Radiohead that you dislike -- or what it is they lack that makes you indifferent.
Meaningful lyrics, decent hooks, and songs that don't drag on interminably while the lead singer warbles over what may as well be electronica (i.e. crap). Radiohead manages to combine electronica with nasal whining AND jam bands, which are like the three forms of musical kryptonite to me. All we'd need is for Yorke to start doing whiny rap about his many cars and girlfriends and it'd be, like, anti-music.
Oddly, I like the Decemberists quite a bit, despite the above list of dislikes. So clearly there's something they're capable of doing that Radiohead is not. Not sucking, I suppose. Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
I've heard of Radiohead, but, to my knowledge, haven't heard Radiohead.
I am old.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
This is why TomDavidson is one of the Four Horsemen.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
That last post of Tom's would have been an awesome 30K landmark. Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson:
quote:Also, I'm curious as to what it is about Radiohead that you dislike -- or what it is they lack that makes you indifferent.
Meaningful lyrics, decent hooks, and songs that don't drag on interminably while the lead singer warbles over what may as well be electronica (i.e. crap). Radiohead manages to combine electronica with nasal whining AND jam bands, which are like the three forms of musical kryptonite to me.
That's actually pretty interesting. I didn't know much about your taste in music before and that clarifies a lot. Thanks.
Re: electronic music, I used to be a card-carrying member of the electronic = crap club, but I've been exploring electronic music for four or five years now and groups like Boards of Canada, M83, Venetian Snares, and autechre have completely changed my opinion. [Added: I think you'd hate autechre and dislike Venetian Snares, but M83 have some fantastic hooks. The album Dead Cities, Red Seas, and Lost Ghosts might be worth your while.]
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: Oddly, I like the Decemberists quite a bit, despite the above list of dislikes. So clearly there's something they're capable of doing that Radiohead is not. Not sucking, I suppose.
That's interesting. I actually dislike the Decemberists. They're... well, bland.
Posted by The Flying Dracula Hair (Member # 10155) on :
What bands/musicians/songs do you like Orincoro?
And when people say they don't like electronic/a, is it music that's just made with synths or whatever or is it some sort of basic electronica style. I always thought electronica was a record store term to house all the different sorts of dance music, but correcting me if I am wrong.
Edit: of
[ February 29, 2008, 12:37 PM: Message edited by: The Flying Dracula Hair ]
Posted by mackillian (Member # 586) on :
quote:At least my face answers phone calls.
I have a phone?
Also, I just discovered M83 and now have a playlist of them. It's great for background music for writing.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: I've heard of Radiohead, but, to my knowledge, haven't heard Radiohead.
I am old.
If its any consolation, I'm in the same position despite *not* being old.
Although I can somewhat pin that on being from somewhat of a different culture.
Posted by Launchywiggin (Member # 9116) on :
quote:I just think they're popular with people who like pretentious things that suck.
I'm definitely in this camp.
Though, to take the defense: I don't care about lyrics, "decent hooks" mean much less to me than things like orchestration, tone color, and harmonic creativity, and Thom Yorke's voice is like 5/10 on the scale of whininess. Any pop-punk band out these days makes Thom Yorke's voice seem like Dean Martin.
"Electronica" is very misleading, too. Radiohead is anything but "dance" music. Definite elements of minimalism, but having electronic sounds in your mix doesn't automatically equal "suck". Almost all radiohead songs work acoustically, too. Check out the studio and live versions of "Like Spinning Plates".
Posted by The Flying Dracula Hair (Member # 10155) on :
I've only heard two or three songs over the years, but I thought Radiohead was a rock band.
Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :
The studio version of "Like Spinning Plates" is backwards. The live version is not backwards. Putting the backwards version on the album struck me as ruining a perfectly good song.
I like Yorke's acoustic renditions of the stuff on his (electronic) solo album, but IMO the best example (as I noted on the last page) is the live version of Idioteque versus the studio version.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by twinky:
In fact, since seeing Radiohead live, I hardly ever listen to the album versions of Kid A or Amnesiac songs -- I listen to the live recordings of those songs that I have from the show I attended. I think Radiohead are an incredible live band and you've really sold them short in that regard -- presumably due to not having seen them live.
Idioteque is a great example. I liked the album version -- I liked Kid A -- but the live version was really remarkable. Very different, and I liked the changes. Admittedly, I don't know that I'd like the live version to be the studio version, but I'd love a well-recorded live EP with Idioteque on it, for example.
Allow me to clarify then, because I think they are a great live band, but they are not, and certainly Kid A is the prime example, a stage-writing, or live-oriented band when it comes to albums.
KidA/Amnesiac were recorded without any regard for and live performance- they were made primarily through additive and granular synthesis, essentially a process were the musician composes and records many of the parts seperately. In Radiohead's case, who parts of the albums and the music was developed on different platforms by the different members, and then mixed together and Thom York's voice was added. The band, at least for those albums, never came together and learned the songs and played them together- they're just not that kind of album. None of the songs from Kid A were premiered live, and Amnesiac was only because the band had begun learning the songs after the release of Kid A
In that particular situation, Radiohead was as much a composition group or collective with different focuses, and this was by most accounts a very tense period for the band. Especially considering that when they toured, they had to arrange and learn to play all of their songs together after they had already been made. That can be difficult considering each member then exerts their influence on music that they did not create themselves.
So it hasn't always been a stage-oriented band, even though the band is good on stage, maybe great on stage. The songs aren't really written for the stage, and maybe that's why you enjoy the arrangements that they do end up performing- you like the style of a stage-band better than a studio band, but they are different disciplines.
Edit: No, I don't like live concerts anyway, but I've listened to a lot of their recordings and seen many utube videos of performances.
One album I have is called "A Smell of Recognition," which is an amalgam of live acoustic radiohead songs performed by the band. Some are ok, but actually many of the tracks are GOD AWFUL. Specifically "I Might be Wrong" ends up sounding like a steaming pile of musical crap. My opinion.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
Twinky-
I disagree, I think Tom might actually like Autechre. Who knows? I have been a fan since I first heard them, but it's not music to listen to over and over again for me- once in a while because it's interesting stuff.
They are also huge innovators with recording and generation, especially helping to popularize Max/Msp in more dance oriented music- although Autechre is not a techno group, they just have leanings toward that particular sound.
See the thing is, you have to remember that just because a band uses sounds that remind you of a different genre, that doesn 't place the band in that genre. Autechre uses alot of the sound material you might find in house music, but the textures of their pieces are completely different- so at first blush it looks like techno, but if you listen, you'll find it's definitely not techno.
Also Autechre's sound applications, recording fidelity and production is so top notch, a discerning ear can tell when they have produced a particular track- it just sounds better no matter how you listen- more clarity, well defined sounds, crisp and precise editing. It's pretty impressive stuff for the technical elements alone.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by twinky: The studio version of "Like Spinning Plates" is backwards. The live version is not backwards. Putting the backwards version on the album struck me as ruining a perfectly good song.
I like Yorke's acoustic renditions of the stuff on his (electronic) solo album, but IMO the best example (as I noted on the last page) is the live version of Idioteque versus the studio version.
Again, the reversed song is the original choice of the band, for whatever reason. It was not a song developed on the road and then "ruined." In my view, what happens to a song or a piece before it is debuted is under the purview of the composer or creator alone. There is not ruining something that doesn't exist in public site, I guess is my opinion. Once it's out, you can say that it is improved by the live performance, but I don't think it's right to suggest that the song is ruined in its original rendition, because when it was introduced, the band did not provide you the opportunity to compare the two.
It's just a semantic thing, but the composer type in me clings to the right of the creator to decide when a piece is "done." What you say brings up the idea of "fixing" the song or "correcting" it, and I think historically that has led us down a difficult path with all kinds of art. You should try to approach a first version without an eye for what it should have been- because then it's just good art that got screwed up, which applies to everything that is bad, essentially. I guess I just think you should take their studio albums on their own terms, and separate your image of the live band from that.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by Noemon:
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade: [You will find their older stuff is so different from their current stuff it's almost a different band...almost.
Think The Beatles' "Happiness is a Warm Gun" Vs "Obla Di Obla Da."
You know that those are on the same album, right? Might be better to go with "Baby's in Black" and "I Want You (She's So Heavy)" or something.
Actually yes I did. I think the White Album was a smattering of classic Beatle sound and what would be coming had they kept releasing albums. Although it is fair to note that Obla Di was by McCartney and Happiness Is A Warm Gun was by Lennon.
It's an apt comparison to say OK Computer. Or even My Iron Lung EP.
Also I cannot locate where exactly Tom created his 30,000th post.
Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :
quote:None of the songs from Kid A were premiered live
Quick note, this isn't true. How to Disappear Completely was performed live well before Kid A was released. I even heard a recording of one such live performance.
quote:t was not a song developed on the road and then "ruined."
It clearly had to be recorded forward first before being mixed in reverse. Perhaps it wasn't developed "on the road," but it had to be written and recorded (even in pieces) forward before it ended up on the album in reverse.
I'm absolutely entitled to think that they ruined it by doing that. [Added: When I initially heard it on the album I disliked it; when I heard the forward version live I thought it was pretty good.]
My feelings about autechre are similar to yours, but that doesn't mean I think Tom would like them. When I suggest music to people I don't start with what my favourites are, I start with what I think they would like. That was the basis of my hypothetical Radiohead list for Icarus, for example.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
twink- I stand corrected- but a majority of kida/amnesiac was created in the studio. Besides, the versions of HTDC that they played lived were very different, and had no strings. According to the band, Johny Greenwood masterminded the entire recording mostly on his own or with Godrich, and did most of the work in the studio.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by mackillian:
quote:At least my face answers phone calls.
I have a phone?
Posted by mackillian (Member # 586) on :
rivka, is the phone the thing I play scrabble on?
quote:When I suggest music to people I don't start with what my favourites are, I start with what I think they would like.
You know, you're actually quite good at matching music recommendations to what a person would like. I know you recommended stuff to me before and were right on the money.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by mackillian: rivka, is the phone the thing I play scrabble on?
Um . . . I don't know?
Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :
quote:Originally posted by mackillian:
quote:When I suggest music to people I don't start with what my favourites are, I start with what I think they would like.
You know, you're actually quite good at matching music recommendations to what a person would like. I know you recommended stuff to me before and were right on the money.
Aw, shucks. I like introducing people to new stuff they they like about as much as I like being introduced to new stuff I like. Which is to say, a lot.
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
You're definitely good at it (he typed while listening to Planets Conspire).
Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :
Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :
*bump*
This is the ultimate version of Canon Rock: 40 different YouTube Canon Rock videos stitched together to create a medley. I'm not particularly enamored of the Canon in D, nor am I overly fond of the Canon Rock phenomenon, but I do think it's fabulous that someone has taken the time to knit together a Canon Rock medley of joy. Posted by Strider (Member # 1807) on :
that was great twinky.
I don't know whether to think it's crazy someone did that, or that it was really just a matter of time.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
It's a waste of time. Please die thread.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
There's this new feature in browsers that allows you to not click on links you think are a waste of time.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
Really? Really? Is there a tool for getting you off my case? Is there? IS THERE?
Posted by Strider (Member # 1807) on :
I think it's the same tool Dag mentions in his previous post. It's multi-purpose.
Posted by Jim-Me (Member # 6426) on :
The world's longest Ibanez commercial? (not surprisingly, there were a staggering number of Vai and Petrucci signature models in there)
Back to Radiohead for a sec (if I'm not pointless in bringing it back up) I can't stand them, but, oddly, a whole bunch of my favorite musicians to play with really dig them. So I have to presume they have *something*, it just doesn't work for me one bit.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by Strider: I think it's the same tool Dag mentions in his previous post. It's multi-purpose.
Disappointing. I could go for something in high-powered "laser."
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro: Really? Really? Is there a tool for getting you off my case? Is there? IS THERE?
I don't know. Is there a tool for getting you to stop bitching about the kind of music other people like?
Posted by ElJay (Member # 6358) on :
I think it's called a growing upper, and will take 5 - 10 years to work.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
I should mention that it's also possible to ignore Orincoro.
You don't have to keep complaining about a one-trick pony; you are completely free to smirk and walk away.
Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jim-Me: The world's longest Ibanez commercial?
Yeah. I've been contemplating buying a decent guitar, and a couple of Ibanez models have been on my short list for a fair while, but I'm kind of torn.
I want a guitar that can produce a robust, meaty metal texture, but I also want one that can produce more of a snarling texture, as well as one that can produce a crunchy blues texture. (All distorted, of course. ) Ibanez is the obvious choice for the first, a Les Paul for the second, and a Les Paul for the third as well unless I keep my current no-name Strat around for that purpose (which it serves fairly well).
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:I should mention that it's also possible to ignore Orincoro.
Of course it is. It's also possible to ignore my not ignoring Orincoro.
And it's also possible to ignore your not ignoring my not ignoring Orincoro.
Posted by Papa Moose (Member # 1992) on :
So I can clearly not choose the wine in front of you.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
You're trying to trick me into giving away something. It won't work.
Posted by cmc (Member # 9549) on :
Heh to Papa Moose... ; )
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dagonee:
quote:I should mention that it's also possible to ignore Orincoro.
Of course it is. It's also possible to ignore my not ignoring Orincoro.
And it's also possible to ignore your not ignoring my not ignoring Orincoro.
I thought you didn't know.
But now that you do, all that remains is to help you understand why you SHOULD.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:But now that you do, all that remains is to help you understand why you SHOULD.
No, all that remains is for you to accept the fact that we differ on what forum behavior is worthy of comment. I mean, you clearly think some forum behavior is worthy of comment, else you wouldn't have commented on mine.
Well, you've stated your opinion that I should adopt your standards. You just don't seem to have bothered to say what those standards are or why they are preferable.
Posted by Strider (Member # 1807) on :
quote:Originally posted by Papa Moose: So I can clearly not choose the wine in front of you.
Icarus still holds the best use of that line ever.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
No fair without a link!
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
Agreed!
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dagonee:
quote:But now that you do, all that remains is to help you understand why you SHOULD.
No, all that remains is for you to accept the fact that we differ on what forum behavior is worthy of comment. I mean, you clearly think some forum behavior is worthy of comment, else you wouldn't have commented on mine.
Vanity, vanity...
I was commenting on ElJay's post. But yours works, too.
quote:you've stated your opinion that I should adopt your standards. You just don't seem to have bothered to say what those standards are or why they are preferable.
I have said what those standards are-- ignore Orincoro when he behaves snottily.
I did not explicitly state the reason those standards are preferable.
Ignoring semi-rude posts is preferable it avoids contention, which exacerbates a hostile attitude. A hostile attitude is damaging to the forum because it discourages open and clear conversation and promotes personal judgment over topical, direct, and pertinent debate.
I allow that ignoring trolls may not be the best way to get them off the forum. I allow that confronting them may do more to preserve clear conversation than ignoring them
I do not grant that Orincoro has been a troll in this thread. Therefore, I think your and ElJay's reaction is not warranted.
Clear enough?
Posted by ElJay (Member # 6358) on :
For the record, I generally am in favor of ignoring as well. But, you know, only human.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:Ignoring semi-rude posts is preferable it avoids contention, which exacerbates a hostile attitude. A hostile attitude is damaging to the forum because it discourages open and clear conversation and promotes personal judgment over topical, direct, and pertinent debate.
Posts like the one I originally responded to generate the same attitude. Why are you opposed to my addressing such posts, for pretty much the same reason as you have addressed mine and ElJay's?
quote:Clear enough?
Clear. Except for the part where you explain why this doesn't apply to you.
You're wrong.
But you're clear.
quote:I was commenting on ElJay's post. But yours works, too.
Regardless of to whom the first post was directed, it is clear that you did comment on at least one of mine.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
How am I wrong?
Can you show where your insistence to NOT ignore someone has produced a better atmosphere on the forum?
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:Can you show where your insistence to NOT ignore someone has produced a better atmosphere on the forum?
Perhaps you like a forum where one free shot gets to go commented, and then someone goes after the person who responds rather than the original shooter.
I don't.
Has your insistence to not ignore the comments here produced a better atmosphere on the forum?
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
At the very least, it's helped me understand some of your more vocal detractors' points.
Look, Dag-- if it was someone whose behavior was consistently trollish everywhere, on every topic, I could agree with the way you've handled this situation. Like I said, if he'd been acting trollish rather than snobby, your reaction, IMO, would be warranted. (It might or might not be how I'd react)
I don't see his behavior as warranting the snarkiniess you've pushed his way. In fact, I see your snarkiness as less conducive to a good atmosphere here than his snobbishness. Thus, why I'm pointing it up.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:I don't see his behavior as warranting the snarkiniess you've pushed his way. In fact, I see your snarkiness as less conducive to a good atmosphere here than his snobbishness. Thus, why I'm pointing it up.
I thought you weren't addressing me originally.
I disagree with your assessment. You haven't done anything to convince me otherwise, since all you've done is restate your opinion without providing any meaningful distinction between what I did - respond with minor snark to someone's post I thought wasn't conducive to a good forum atmosphere - and what you did - also respond with minor snark to someone's post you thought wasn't conducive to a good forum atmosphere.
The only distinction you've made is your still-unexplained opinion that what I responded to wasn't as bad as what you responded to. That's not going to cut it with me.
So I ask again, given the standard you've articulated - which seems to be whether one's insistence in not ignoring particular forum behavior one dislikes produces a better atmosphere on the forum - are you justified in calling me out on this?
Posted by Strider (Member # 1807) on :
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro: Really? Really? Is there a tool for getting you off my case? Is there? IS THERE?
I don't know. Is there a tool for getting you to stop bitching about the kind of music other people like?
This is a minor snark?
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
Yes.
Now ask yourself, especially considering that you've now brought this to a brand new page, is this "conducive to a good atmosphere here"?
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
No, but I mostly blame you for that.
The point being that you'll understand how some people feel about your tenacious attention to people with whom you disagree. Hopefully, understanding that some people find your aggressive snark to be detrimental to the forum, you'll reconsider using it so often.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
Sometimes you have to look in the most random of threads to find the strangest arguments going on.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:No, but I mostly blame you for that.
Yeah, but you're wrong.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
I know, right?
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:The point being that you'll understand how some people feel about your tenacious attention to people with whom you disagree. Hopefully, understanding that some people find your aggressive snark to be detrimental to the forum, you'll reconsider using it so often.
I'd be willing to consider that from someone who gave any indication that they actually believed the principle they were espousing. I've seen no indication of that from you. Rather, all I've seen is you exercising a privilege you would like me not to.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
HA!
That's too nice a posting coincidence to mess with.
quote:Originally posted by Dagonee:
quote:No, but I mostly blame you for that.
Yeah, but you're wrong.
Ah, well. Hopefully it will be a couple days before I have to be wrong again.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dagonee: I'd be willing to consider that from someone who gave any indication that they actually believed the principle they were espousing. I've seen no indication of that from you. Rather, all I've seen is you exercising a privilege you would like me not to.
Huh.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
Scott, you must be aware that Dagonee, much like an ancient river, will simply run over and over your opinions and positions until they are polished down to nothing but a depression in the Earth. I think he likes do that more than he likes actually contributing what I would call "unique and interesting" input into any given conversation. Instead, he depends on the wrongness of everyone around him to keep him flowing downhill. This is why lawyers are rich, but do not invent things. Though we need lawyers, sometimes, this reminds of why that fact is frustrating.
So, you clearly can't choose the wine in front of yourself.
Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
A Scott R and Dagonee argument. Hmmm...all you dudes need is a common enemy to get you back on the same page.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro: Scott, you must be aware that Dagonee, much like an ancient river, will simply run over and over your opinions and positions until they are polished down to nothing but a depression in the Earth. I think he likes do that more than he likes actually contributing what I would call "unique and interesting" input into any given conversation. Instead, he depends on the wrongness of everyone around him to keep him flowing downhill. This is why lawyers are rich, but do not invent things. Though we need lawyers, sometimes, this reminds of why that fact is frustrating.
So, you clearly can't choose the wine in front of yourself.
As much as I think this argument between Scott and Dag is silly, I think it's a mite rude to dismiss Dag's manner of arguing.
Complaining that he breaks down the opposition's arguments and simply outlasts everyone is like complaining that African wild dogs don't hunt fair because they don't run too fast or too slow and simply wait until their prey get tired of running.
It's not as if Dag is invincible at the argument table, I've seen him accept correction before. Don't complain that he won't change his mind when your or anyone else's arguments don't stand his rigorous examinations. If Dag is wrong, and does not see it, life will somehow go on I am sure.
Finally, it's really poor form for people to keep bringing up the fact he is an attorney, as if that ought to provoke some ire from the peanut gallery. I work at Burrells-Luce, but if somebody said, "That's BlackBlade the press clipper," and acted as if that were the embodiment of who I am, it would really start to bug me. Sure being a lawyer to a significant extent says who Dag is, but it's hardly more important than the fact that he is a man or that he is Catholic.
I only say all this Orincoro because I don't think it falls on deaf ears.
Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
I get the feeling that you have no idea how much Americans hate lawyers. That's understandable, since you spent most of your life out of the country.
Posted by scifibum (Member # 7625) on :
OK, I'm pretty neutral (no preference between Dag and Scott as to whose posts I'd rather read), fresh to the issue (don't post here much, read only a small fraction of threads), and, of course, wholly objective and infallible ...
and Dag is right. Scott R snarkily telling Dagonee not to post snark in response to (whoever) is no different and no more defensible than Dag doing it to (whoever).
It's like slapping somebody to get him to stop slapping somebody else (who was just asking for it).
I'm going to move on now; feel free to slap me.
Posted by The Flying Dracula Hair (Member # 10155) on :
*slap*
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
Let me reiterate:
Huh.
Posted by Jim-Me (Member # 6426) on :
The difference is that I don't think Scott was being snarky about it-- though I can see how his comments could be taken that way, I honestly think he's been consistently trying to lighten the mood
I say this as, not only someone who gets more worked up than Dagonee does, but as someone who admires Dagonee both as a poster and as an IRL person.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by steven: I get the feeling that you have no idea how much Americans hate lawyers. That's understandable, since you spent most of your life out of the country.
Nope. I definitely know the sentiment, and have heard my fair share of lawyer jokes. I've heard the tired old, "The only ones who made money in that multi-million dollar class action lawsuit was the lawyers."
It's when the humor makes that jump into intended maliciousness that it becomes irksome.
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
Evan Marshall. You can hear it on his CD "The Lone Arranger".
![[Cry]](graemlins/cry.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Evil]](graemlins/evil.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
[Added: Also, I felt it was a very passionless performance. That was a turn-off.]![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Wave]](graemlins/wave.gif)
Hey Lloyd. How was your big 23? ![[Laugh]](graemlins/laugh.gif)
Radiohead's "Talk Show Host" is one of my faaavorite songs. ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
)and:![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
I'm definitely in this camp. ![[Blushing]](graemlins/blushing.gif)
I like introducing people to new stuff they they like about as much as I like being introduced to new stuff I like. Which is to say, a lot.