Talent - Music Banter Music Banter

Go Back   Music Banter > The Music Forums > General Music
Register Blogging Today's Posts
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 01-08-2016, 06:15 AM   #1 (permalink)
 
Plainview's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 721
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frownland View Post
ftfy

I honestly think that The Shaggs are a pretty good counter argument to the tech=talent argument because their music shows that a primitive approach to music can be pretty awesome if you don't get caught up on the technical aspects of it.

To elaborate I'll use Lou Reed as an example. The dude can sing four notes, but he's talented in that he can take that limited (and not all that appealing from a conventional standpoint not counting his own music) and make it into something great.
I mean I see your point but the lines are blurred between something being unconventional or simply not very good. I mean the fact I enjoy The Shaggs music shows their must be some qualities that work well, and I buy the primitive point you made actually. Lou Reed had very strong lyricism and song-writing to make up for his range, and he used his lack of 'conventional' singing ability to his advantage by presenting his lyricism and world views in a gritty and humorous way that no one had really done before. I guess Dylan's similar in that respect. I guess my point is that I can break down the elements that make someone like Lou Reed talented and innovative, whereas The Shaggs are somehow more than the sum of their parts, for no individual areas strikes me as being skilful or novel or dynamic. It's just that the layers of amateurishness sort of mesh together into something quite hypnotic, but it's basically down to the charm and lack of ability.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeadChannel
The overuse of babe/baby, the lack of any sort of discernible originality, the melodrama and the general sense of an especially heinous sort of hardcore vapid stupidity all make me want to jab my eyes out with a drill-press and then hang myself from the CN Tower with an electrified rope that sends shocks in excess of 10,000 volts through my body as I slowly die. While listening to Dream Theater.

Last edited by Plainview; 01-08-2016 at 01:04 PM.
Plainview is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2016, 11:53 AM   #2 (permalink)
Toasted Poster
 
Chula Vista's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: SoCal by way of Boston
Posts: 11,332
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frownland View Post
To elaborate I'll use Lou Reed as an example. The dude can sing four notes, but he's talented in that he can take that limited (and not all that appealing from a conventional standpoint not counting his own music) and make it into something great.
Was about to totally agree with you but then this;

Quote:
Originally Posted by Plainview View Post
Lou Reed had very strong lyricism and song-writing to make up for his range, and he used his lack of 'conventional' singing ability to his advantage by presenting his lyricism and world views in a gritty and humorous way that no one had really done before.
Totally agree.
__________________

“The fact that we live at the bottom of a deep gravity well,
on the surface of a gas covered planet going around a nuclear fireball 90 million miles away
and think this to be normal is obviously some indication of how skewed our perspective tends to be.”
Chula Vista is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Similar Threads



© 2003-2025 Advameg, Inc.