Music Banter

Go Back   Music Banter > The Music Forums > General Music
Register Blogging Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Welcome to Music Banter Forum! Make sure to register - it's free and very quick! You have to register before you can post and participate in our discussions with over 70,000 other registered members. After you create your free account, you will be able to customize many options, you will have the full access to over 1,100,000 posts.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-29-2014, 01:15 PM   #101 (permalink)
David Hasselhoff
 
Paul Smeenus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Back in Portland, OR
Posts: 3,192
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Screen13 View Post
In a way, and I know that this is going to sound very stereotypical, but Disco did encourage homosexuals to step out, especially in the US where there was still a lot of resistance and not so well known rules which targeted the gay lifestyle ("Sodomy Law"). The Rockist music listeners made their disgust very clear by the end of the decade and not just with the infamous record blowup sparked by a DJ who was out of a job once his station decided to switch to a Disco/Dance format - you can also catty that to a lot of the US' response to New Pop/New Wave in the Early 80's. True, there were a lot of gimmicks, drugs, fast living, Disco Ducks, Boogie Nights, and such, but there was a lot of codes in the music which subverted if you were listening, although of course there were a few bold songs and - you might say that nothing was hidden when you hear Sylvester sing "You Make Me Feel Mighty Real" once you knew what he was about and how that song may have reflected a liberation in some listeners. For all human sexuality that accepted if one was straight/gay/bi, it was a time that did have some serious messages although sadly covered in a lot of glitter and fun, but as the song said "Love Is the Message", and in a time after Nixon almost had a nation under pre-80's Religious Right oppression, that was all one needed to hear to feel at least liberated.

In this light, I have the feeling that this is where I'm getting at...

Sometimes, especially after eras of Republican Presidency, the messages turn to personal matters possibly to re-assure those on the outside that they have a vital part in living while there's still a lot of resistance. Sadly, many of these messages can be very campy although maybe that's the way to attract them. In one's list of modern examples I see a lot of self-assurance, and while I admittedly viewed that with sarcasm in another topic, I took a step back and though again for a few seconds.

The only thing I see wrong today is the way that it's presented. Too smothering and not real enough, almost like Bubblegum with an attitude. Those on the Right/Tea Party side have easy targets - too many cliches and not enough reality. Sadly, it's possibly where the Mainstream Media wants it to be.

Getting back to Politics...

The music industry has way too many connections for an artist to actually make a deadly serious political message these days - maybe some lip service to the side they're on, but something not as hard hitting as before with maybe a few exceptions here and there. Plus, those who might be interested in making a deep message have years of well-known banana peel slips of the career connected to shouting out something but not having the conviction to make things a lifelong commitment. Plus, there's also several well known examples in the arts of those who burned out after some massive fights with "The Powers That Be" (Think TV's Smothers Brothers who returned very neutered in The 70's or legendary Comedian Lenny Bruce who just turned to the needle). It takes guts to stand out, but in this hyper-watching era of critics and listeners who take note of every contradiction, you know that it's going to take more smarts, and that involves knowing when and where to make your stand if you really want to voice something.

Today in the end, the only musicians trying to make an impact either personally or politically know that they have to work independently. This is not a critique but an observation. Just my viewpoint.

Best post to this thread
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by grindy View Post
Basically you're David Hasselhoff.
Gentle Giant Catalog Review

The entire Ditty Bops catalog reviewed
Paul Smeenus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2014, 01:32 PM   #102 (permalink)
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,304
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Black Francis View Post
hahaha wtf are you talking about?

Sometimes you remind me of conspiracy brotha you always gotta play that race card.

What more credit can you give to black ppl? they practically invented music and influenced a whole generation of suburban wiggas, and why is that? oh right, CAUSE THEY PLAY THEIR SONGS ON THE RADIO!

I honestly don't think it's a racial thing AT ALL, if a white girl makes a better R & B song than a black girl she deserves that spot on the radio.

Did you understand the point of me using that as an example? lol

It is clear you didn't...
Soulflower is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2014, 01:32 PM   #103 (permalink)
Out of Place
 
Black Francis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: in an abstract house
Posts: 4,004
Default

@Screen

Wow, way to break it down man, it's true, disco did start a little gay revolution in a way, right about that time studio 54 was huge and sexual labels were very loose and the music set the stage for this.

Also i agree on some points you made but not on others, you said record companies have their own political agendas and that is true but i also think some record companies can back up an artist if he is popular enough even if he contradicts their political agenda.

As that SOAD songs says, "The bottom line is money, nobody gives a F*ck"

Even left wing liberals carry their own agenda, and just like conservatives they justify this agenda as being 'for the good of the ppl' so really, it's up to you to pick your side but both teams do the same sh*t.

That's why i don't really care if music has any social relevance, because i don't live my life according to their message, i welcome any song that helps change the world for the better but in this case music is just a tool to unite ppl in that message.
__________________
"Hey Kids you got to meet the MIGHTY PIXIES!"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JbRbCtIgW3A
Black Francis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2014, 01:38 PM   #104 (permalink)
Out of Place
 
Black Francis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: in an abstract house
Posts: 4,004
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by realtalk92 View Post
Did you understand the point of me using that as an example? lol

It is clear you didn't...
I did, i just don't understand why you had to make it a racial thing.

I agree sometimes with what you say but that race thing bothers me, you seem to plug it in at every opportunity you get, this is not the first time you've used that race card.
__________________
"Hey Kids you got to meet the MIGHTY PIXIES!"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JbRbCtIgW3A
Black Francis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2014, 01:49 PM   #105 (permalink)
Music Addict
 
Necromancer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,622
Default

The diversity of note combination. Roughly speaking, chords plus melodies has consistently diminished in the last 50 years. Pop music is a lot louder today and melodies are becoming more and more similar relying on a much smaller use of timbres than in the past.
So many instruments are synthesized and rely on digital processing these days.

I'm not suggesting that a particular era, genre, or artist is "as good as it gets" artistically. Just pointing out a few of the differences between the production of todays music in relation to that of the past.
Necromancer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2014, 02:02 PM   #106 (permalink)
Out of Place
 
Black Francis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: in an abstract house
Posts: 4,004
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Necromancer View Post
The diversity of note combination. Roughly speaking, chords plus melodies has consistently diminished in the last 50 years. Pop music is a lot louder today and melodies are becoming more and more similar relying on a much smaller use of timbres than in the past.
So many instruments are synthesized and rely on digital processing these days.

I'm not suggesting that a particular era, genre, or artist is "as good as it gets" artistically. Just pointing out a few of the differences between the production of todays music in relation to that of the past.
Agree, although i don't think that has anything to do with the message of their songs which is the topic of this thread.

I personally luv old school punk, i luv how the drums sound cheap and awful, i think some music of the past was enhanced by their limitation (production wise i mean) the lack of refinement added to the ambience, nowadays music is too refined. there is a raw element that gets lost in the translation.
__________________
"Hey Kids you got to meet the MIGHTY PIXIES!"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JbRbCtIgW3A
Black Francis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2014, 02:04 PM   #107 (permalink)
killedmyraindog
 
TheBig3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Boston, Massachusetts
Posts: 9,382
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Two Spirit View Post
When I say pussified, I'm not talking about music becoming too feminine/less masculine, but rather how modern day music has become too soft with no daring messages.

Most of us know about the controversial artists throughout music history. Not only was their music engaging, but their ideas were as well and they had something to say. Regardless of their politics, they all made an effort to challenge different social norms of their time.

Elvis simply challenged social norms just by performing in unconventional ways, John Lennon was a peace activist, David Bowie challenged norms surrounding gender and sexuality, Marilyn Manson actively challenged religion, etc. There are too many to be mentioned, but all of these artists seemed to stand for something and meant what they said.

Sadly, I can't say the same about mainstream stars today. If you really take a look at the musical landscape, the most offensive or "out there" artist is Lady Gaga, and that's sad. I love Gaga, but she doesn't really push any boundaries and is mostly a safe artist who just dresses differently.

I don't want this to come off as a "back in my day" type of thread, but modern music to me has no message or meaning. There's no rebellious spirit or groundbreaking artists in the mainstream, whereas in the past there was at least two or three significant artists per decade that made a difference musically and culturally. I just don't see that with today's artists.

Thoughts?
Maybe you're listening to ****ty music.
TheBig3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2014, 02:14 PM   #108 (permalink)
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,304
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Black Francis View Post
I did, i just don't understand why you had to make it a racial thing.

I agree sometimes with what you say but that race thing bothers me, you seem to plug it in at every opportunity you get, this is not the first time you've used that race card.
Race bothers everyone which is why people do not like talking about it because it makes most uncomfortable. Once again that was not the reason why I used it. It was the first example I thought of which is why I used it. You chose to focus on the racial aspect instead of focusing on the fact that the industry chooses to promote certain artists. That in essence has nothing to do with the race card and has everything to do with the fact that the industry is in control of how successful pop artists become.
Soulflower is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2014, 02:29 PM   #109 (permalink)
Out of Place
 
Black Francis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: in an abstract house
Posts: 4,004
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by realtalk92 View Post
Race bothers everyone which is why people do not like talking about it because it makes most uncomfortable. Once again that was not the reason why I used it. It was the first example I thought of which is why I used it. You chose to focus on the racial aspect instead of focusing on the fact that the industry chooses to promote certain artists. That in essence has nothing to do with the race card and has everything to do with the fact that the industry is in control of how successful pop artists become.
Moi? im srry but it was YOU who made it a racial thing and now you're saying that whole race thing doesn't matter. (my point from the start)
__________________
"Hey Kids you got to meet the MIGHTY PIXIES!"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JbRbCtIgW3A
Black Francis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2014, 02:39 PM   #110 (permalink)
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,304
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Black Francis View Post
Moi? im srry but it was YOU who made it a racial thing and now you're saying that whole race thing doesn't matter. (my point from the start)

My point was I used that example to show how the industry controls how certain artists get promoted not to make this discussion a race issue.

Just because I mentioned African Americans/White Artists does not change the purpose of my main point of the example.

I do not regret using that example.
Soulflower is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes



© 2003-2020 Advameg, Inc.