Estate of the music
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Other music related lounges
Forum Name: General Music Discussions
Forum Description: Discuss and create polls about all types of music
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=77157
Printed Date: July 18 2025 at 23:25
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Estate of the music
Posted By: leonalvarado
Subject: Estate of the music
Date Posted: March 30 2011 at 23:40
|
Hello all, I'm basically copying my own copy that I posted somewhere in the world of facebook. I thought this forum might be more appropriate. This note is a somewhat a bit off my current path. It is perhaps a rant of sorts but, I have a strong feeling about the subject so therefore I must write something. If you like Rebbeca Black, you might as well stop reading this now.
A little teenager armed with auto-tune equipment and some of daddy's money decides to record her own song and make a video about it. Being the dad of two daughters that at one point or another wanted to become singing stars, I can understand the kid's desire to do what she did. I do not understand however, the fascination that people have towards the bad and the mediocre. This girl supposedly has recorded the worst song ever written by anyone but, (and this one's a big BUT), more than 33 million people have seen her video on You Tube and she has already made around $25,000.00 on iTunes downloads. How low can we go as a society?
Meantime, there are many talented artists (or at least clever artists) with pretty good music that struggle with this concept. I don't even think she did it originally for the money! This leaves me with no sound excuse as to why her little song has sold like gangbusters and my CDs haven't sold enough copies to even cover their costs.
I try to compare, she has a video and I'm still slowly working on mine (I don't have a rich father to pay for the bloody thing). She has auto-tune and my music so far has no vocals (salvo for one song with minimal vocals). She looks better than me (but you don't know that, mainly because I don't have a video with a bunch of my friends riding on a car). I could be the best looking thing that no one has ever seen, (not).
I have two of the biggest talents in progressive rock (Bill Bruford and John Goodsall) performing on my album and she has some dude on a car raping to her song. I'm not only on iTunes but Amazon, Spotify, CD Universe, CDBaby, Napster, etc., she apparently doesn't need that many outlets. I'm old enough to be her dad and have had enough time for her to have much older siblings but she couldn't be my daughter and needless to say, anything else for that matter.
So what gives? The listeners. They are the ones driving this whole thing. The days of loving music for music's sake are long gone. My whole music genre (progressive rock), is stagnant in growth and only adored by those who were there when it all unfolded, thirty-odd years ago. One look at a prog-rock concert today and you know where we stand. A sea of grey and shiny heads, faded concert shirts older than some grown people (don't fret about it, I count myself in this group). Girls still dancing to music never meant for dance. Cute in the seventies when they where nineteen and twenty year old. Not so cute today.
Today is different, today is not the same (Peter Gabriel's quote for all of us who still remember it). Today's young people have the attention span of a fly on speed. Their music comes and goes in a flash and without any of us noticing it. Kid's today don't know who The Who is and worst, they don't care. "Tommy? Tommy who?" That's right kid.
It all makes for a sad estate of the music. Good music still gets out these days. But those making it find it much harder to squeeze a living out of it. Can't see Chris Squire being carried out to the stage in a giant egg like Lady Gaga did at the Oscars. Yet, at the same time I find lots of resistance from prog-rock's fans. For starters, they are not that different from the kids when it comes to paying for music. Basically, no one likes to pay for music anymore. It makes it difficult because there are many bands that need the income. If anything, just to keep making music. Take the band YES for example, many fans have gone into bashing the band for not including Jon Anderson these days. To me, it's all about the music and not so much about who is or who isn't in the band anymore. Sure, it would be ideal for all the favourite members to be included but, if that's not possible, then I'll take any replacement that doesn't ruin the music. I've seen YES more than any other band, nine or ten times. I last saw them earlier this year and it was one of the best times I have ever heard the band play. The music was just spot-on but that didn't seem to matter to those who just wanted to see Jon Anderson at the front of it all. In a way it is somewhat sad. Like I said many a time, some YES is better than no YES and I'm more than willing to let the latest line-up carry on the way they have been. Seriously, how many more years until these fine music legends actually hang their hats? My guess is sooner than later so I want to enjoy it for as long as I can. With or without Jon (no hate mail please).
When my first CD came out, (Plays Genesis and Other Original Stuff), fans either loved it or hated it. not much in between. For a whilst I wondered why. I couldn't figure out where I went wrong. Most critics liked it, it got good reviews in Italy and in the UK. I got many e-mails from fans who liked it. Steve Hackett himself was very complementary and to this day we correspond with each other through e-mails. So, where did I go wrong? The answer is nowhere. I didn't have to "go wrong". I was walking through sacred ground (sort of speak) and that was reason enough to be ostracised by many. Somewhere along the lines it stopped being about the music of Genesis and more about the fans' perception of the band's members. Not being a band member makes me an outsider so therefore, I'm in the wrong. (But hey, my name is on one of their records! Never mind that it was for photography and not for music).
I have being accused of trying to turn a quick profit on someone else's talent. Never mind that we are two years down this road and I'm still don't have a cent to show for profits. What about all the symphony orchestras around the world. Are they trying to make a quick dollar on Bethoven's coat tails? How about the music? Why not giving the thing a chance before making a pre-conceded judgement on it?
My first CD was half Genesis songs and half original songs but many people never took the time to check it all out. My second CD is two thirds original material with the exception of one Genesis song which was carry-over material from the previous album. For my second CD I went out of my element and utilised John Goodsall (Brand X) for the guitars and drum tracks by Bill Bruford (YES, King Crimson, Earthworks). The material is different but the few reviews that I have seen are very favourable. So, why isn't it flying off the shelfs? To me, it is not a matter of having something "fly" off the shelf. It is more about doing the sort of music that I would love to hear as a fan. It is about moving forward musically and taking a few friends along. It is about sharing the result with people of similar taste. And yes, it is about making at least enough money to cover the expenses. That's all I want from it. To cover my cost so that I can do more and share more with the people that love the same music I do.
One way or another I'll be making more music. It is something I enjoy doing. I also enjoy having well-respected musicians play on my records and I am working towards continuing that. My integrity as an artist won't let me do a song like Rebbeca Black's and my looks won't let me do a video like her neither. $25,000.00 is a lot of money made by a single song coming from an unknown. I could easily use a lot less than that in order to keep going.
I just keep wondering....
|
Replies:
Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: March 31 2011 at 00:02
|
yeah that's why it's called Pop |
Posted By: Atoms
Date Posted: March 31 2011 at 00:47
| I just checked out that Rebecca Black on Youtube, this is even worse than the usual stuff I hear. The music industry really is a sad place right now. |
Posted By: TheOppenheimer
Date Posted: March 31 2011 at 01:38
|
at least people can listen to what they want. the world will surely reach a point in where you cant choose. you HAVE to listen to X music, and NOT listen to Y music. god bless all these "under" bands, all the hidden gems and all the amateur artists that create beautiful music out of what their minds can do, not out of what money can buy. ------------- //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// A veces es cuestión de esperar, y tomarte en silencio. |
Posted By: friso
Date Posted: March 31 2011 at 01:59
|
If you look back at the music of the sixties and seventies; it wasn't the silly pop of the time that is still listened to today. Only the bigger and better acts survive the test of time. Big names of today's popscene will mean nothing in twenty years and no collector will search for their absolete music. History isn't influenced by single hypes, it's written in the big lines and in the end the quality of music will prevail.
Having that said I can understand how frustrating these situations about imense populair one-day-flies are for hard working and inventive musicians. Populair culture is defined by very young people (12-18 years old) who still are in the grip of the financial motivated media and it's financial power. Ever thought of the idea that little children (mainly silly girls) would make your music populair? |
Posted By: Nathaniel607
Date Posted: March 31 2011 at 02:14
Yeah, there has never been "music for the sake of music". Even in the classical and jazz ages, popularity biases existed. There was probably a lot of tonally experiment music going on during the classical age that was forgotten because it was hated. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Nathaniel607" rel="nofollow - My Last FM Profile 
|
Cracked.com wrote:Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: March 31 2011 at 02:19
really good point |
Posted By: harmonium.ro
Date Posted: March 31 2011 at 02:21
| ^ true, if you get one of those nostalgia collections with the top 20 singles from yeach year of the 60s and 70s, the difference between what we now know that was great in those years and what we get on the discs is shocking. |
Posted By: Nathaniel607
Date Posted: March 31 2011 at 02:32
But... will that really happen? It happened in the 60s' because the music was popular AND good. But I don't think there are any musicians nowadays with that level of popularity and skill. Maybe Muse fits the bill, but that's all I can think of. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Nathaniel607" rel="nofollow - My Last FM Profile
|
Posted By: npjnpj
Date Posted: March 31 2011 at 02:37
|
Wow, that's one mean-ass song. I think I prefer that frog thing. Apart from that although I know where you're coming from: That's one great story, Grandpahw.  |
Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: March 31 2011 at 05:21
Wrong wrong wrong. Many young people still listen to "classic rawk", and even if they didn't, I see no reason why they should care about The Who. Pop music has never been "good", I am tired of people complaining that the music died because these whippersnappers and their ipods. Any difference in your perceived quality of the majority of popular music of the past and today's popular music is purely the result of your stylistic biases. Friday is a sensation only because it is one of the worst songs of all time and that makes it funny, complaining that it's a bad song is missing the point to the point of stupidity! Nobody actually likes it!
Rebecca Black is not a part of the music industry, at all. Her parents paid $2000 for her to record the vocals on a pre-written song and shoot a video. It was a vanity project and only a few people would have randomly seen it on Youtube if it hadn't been noticed by *chan and Tosh.0 and then picked up everywhere else as a lightning rod for the hate of the entire internet. Also, I do not think estate was the word you meant to use. ------------- if you own a sodastream i hate you |
Posted By: friso
Date Posted: March 31 2011 at 10:06
Depends on how you look at it. It's not only the radio and television that represents what music is listened to in general. There is an underground world of collectors en music enthusiasts that never gets media coverage. A good example is this website, we've got more members then some political parties Holland, but there's never a word about progarchives in our newspapers. |
Posted By: wilmon91
Date Posted: March 31 2011 at 10:36
|
I checked that Rebecka Black video. To me it seems like a deliberate joke, but not in an overobvious way. I think the strategy was to create exactly the kind of popularity it has gotten.
It's an interesting example, because the difference between "obviously bad" and hit music that "works", can be very small. Therefore, a lot of people might be fooled into liking this song. I mean, there is a lot of crappy hit music, it's just not so obviously bad as this example.
You can always say "it's bad - and I like it". It's like this T-Shirt that David Lester of Mecca Normal made
http://www.buyolympia.com/q/Item=ilikecrap" rel="nofollow - http://www.buyolympia.com/q/Item=ilikecrap which says "Actually, I like crap"
So the big interest is created in the way it makes people feel good by being able to pinpoint that it is bad. It makes them feel smart!
So watching the video and saying "Oh how bad it is" - you are falling into the trap. It is supposed to be bad.
People like funny, bad stuff, because it's harmless, you don't have to stand for it, you just buy the mp3 for fun. Create enough interest in anything, and you can make money. ------------- http://www.lastfm.se/user/wilmon91" rel="nofollow - last.fm |
Posted By: leonalvarado
Date Posted: March 31 2011 at 11:22
|
I keep hearing that Rebecca's song is not the music industry but that may not be for long. Here are some interesting facts: " http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billboard_%28magazine%29" rel="nofollow - Billboard estimates sales of approximately 43,000 copies, roughly equivalent to $26,700 in royalties. "Friday" debuted on the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Zealand_Singles_Chart" rel="nofollow - New Zealand Singles Chart at number 33 on March 21, 2011. The song entered the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billboard_Hot_100" rel="nofollow - Billboard Hot 100 at number 72 and rose to 58 the next week. It has sold 87,000 copies over the two weeks."
"Rebecca Black isn't going to rest on her laurels after the online storm she's caused with 'Friday' – she's making a full album. The much-derided singer has already planned the follow-up to the internet smash single: a number called 'LOL'. She's recording the single and album at theFlying Pig Productions studio in Los Angeles, although she's working without a record deal." http://www.nme.com/news/various-artists/55718 So, if people are buying it because is that bad, then they are a lot stupider than I thought. Would you buy an orange if you know it is spoiled or it will taste bad? Would you buy a car that will take you nowhere? Will you buy a song because you know is one of the worst songs ever? On another note, the music industry is decaying and I don't think it is about perceiving the quality of popular music. Yes, there is some truth in that time will put most music to the test and only the most enduring will last. However, what comprises the most "enduring" these days is what worries me. The industry had grown too big for it's trousers and then it all began to fall apart with the advent of the internet. Nowadays and more than ever, record deals are tied up with touring because that's were the real money is. Is more about the show than the music. Record sales are still down from last year which was down from the year before. The whole buying process has changed. One does not need to buy a whole album to get a particular song, that may be good on some instances but, not so much in many others. For example, many people may forgo an entire album and just buy the one song with radio exposure. Loyalty towards a band is also diminishing overall and the popular acts these days seem to be so because of the push by the industry. A band today can be popular for the following: nice hair, looking like a Cinderella story without really being one, a certain look, trait or way of expressing, etc. Somewhere around the end of the list there is the actual musical capabilities. Does Justin Beaver writes his own music? No, and I know, neither did the Monkees. I hated them too. In a way, they represented things to come. A homogenised version of the Beatles created by a corporation with the sole intent to cash into Beatlemania. I'm not saying that there aren't talented people out there making music. There are probably more talented people playing rock than ever. In the sixties there weren't any music schools that specialized in rock and pop music like there are today. What the sixties did have though,was creative people trying to develop their own musical style that would define their musical path. Yes sounds like Yes, Pink Floyd like well, Pink Floyd. Genesis, Gentle Giant, Jethro Tull, Camel, Tangerine Dreams, etc. were very different and very distinct from each other and any other band out there. That is what's great about progressive rock. It requires musicianship, creativity and not necessarily any radio popularity. The so call "Classic Rawk" spoken of today consists of the songs that had heavy rotation on radio during their days. You will never hear anything from "Tales From Topographic Oceans" or "Foxtrot" in that list. Is the "Calssic Rawk" that many young people listen to these days the best of rock? Hardly, and specially so in the case of progressive rock. This is after all, the progressive rock forum, no? To Henry Plainview, I think that kids should care about the Who plainly because their music still light-years away from some of the "best" bands today. And, if the kids are into "Classic Rawk" as you stated, then the music of The Who is a one of it's corner stones. As far as music dying, I never said music was dying but my kind of music is in a sad estate and being replaced by newer and less creative music. Enough reasons for me to complain. In my case it is not about "perceiving" the quality of popular music. I am very well defined in terms of what I like. It is after all, my stylistic bias that gives me the drive to write my rants. Isn't that what ranting is about? As far as "the point of stupidity" that you commented about, isn't it more stupid to buy the song for being bad than to write about how bad it is? "Nobody likes it" but Rebecca sure likes the $26,000 she's got from it so far. One thing's for sure though, tomorrow is Friday and we all know what comes after that. |
Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: March 31 2011 at 14:24
This would be true for the state of American music ... other than Frank Zappa. But it is not true for the European and many other scenes out there ... and "music for the sake of music" ... or as 10CC would say ... "art for art's sakes" ... existed in quite a lot of countries in various forms ... that made it hard to find and listen to in America. However, the nature of art and music and people is ... that it will make itself around and there is no tsunami that can kill it ... that spirit lived and will continue to live. You simply can not kill the human spirit ... you can try as much as you want, with laws and what not, but in the end ...
You might consider watching the BBC special on Krautrock, so you have an idea what the tonal experiments were really all about and how it was looked at in other places and how it developed.
In America, it was all killed by the media and the movie studios, by making sure the "star" and "hero" system stayed in place to support the corporate and the "founding rich fathers" system, and in a joking sort of way ... keep the rest working!
How you say things, or I say them, or others say them, is always an issue, and very tough to deal with ... folks around me, at work, or home, for example, don't give a sh*t about history, and any time one says something about it, it creates issues ... there is no point of reference for those people to figure out or understand what is being said, or suggested, and in the end, American Educational Systems are making sure you don't know history ... because this way you know less and follow more! ------------- Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com |
Posted By: wilmon91
Date Posted: March 31 2011 at 14:58
I don't think people who buy this music think so much in terms of "good" and "bad". The quality isn't the priority for them. I think there are those who buy it "for fun". Those who are more "serious" are those who likes the girl in the video and there are probably girls who wants to identify themselves with her. The video is of course just as important as the music. People like to be part of something that is "current".
Most people aren't interested in music. I believe many people have low self-esteem when it comes to music - they aren't interested in anything particular , and doesn't believe they have an understanding of music (and maybe they don't). They may find a song like this appealing because it doesn't require anything from them. It's not "difficult", it has a feel-good atmosphere, it may be "bad" or silly but that's just fun. It's music for those who doesn't care about music.
Commercials are similar. Most of them are "feel-good" and childish. At least here in Sweden, where they all try to be funny, or being very light and easy and happy, and overly clear, it's all presented as if it was made for very small children.
Well, that's my theories.
 But it is a special case, really. I've already forgotten the song entirely, which is nice. ------------- http://www.lastfm.se/user/wilmon91" rel="nofollow - last.fm |
Posted By: leonalvarado
Date Posted: March 31 2011 at 15:16
|
I like some of the responses on this thread. It shows a diverse train of thought. I can see the comment about people like in Rebecca's song because it doesn't require anything from them. One of my wife's pet peeves about my music has to do with that. She doesn't like progressive rock even though she recognises the musicianship that goes into it. In her mind, it takes too much of your attention which she is not ready to give in. In my mind, I like music for music's sake. I don't dance (my wife hates that too), I don't like cranking the radio (I actually don't much care for radio with a few exceptions). I like to sometimes just sitting in a chair listening to an album with my headphones on. I observe the artwork and read all the liner notes but, more than anything I like to listen to the music. Many times even the lyrics become irrelevant. To me it's all about the music. I guess that is why I have a hard time accepting the fact that people will buy something just because. Meanwhile, there are many records out there worth a good listen that go unnoticed because they are not "catchy" or, as in Rebecca's case, bad enough. Wilmon91, you made the comment about commercials. The issue being that I would not buy a DVD that would only have commercials in it. Not ever. The fact that I feel like a dinosaur for liking quality in my music is the very reason as to why I believe the whole thing is in a decaying orbit.
|
Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: March 31 2011 at 15:31
The days of loving music, or anything else, are NOT gone. What is gone is our ability to see that through the unbelievable mass media tsunami, not to mention advertising ... all of which work really hard to make sure they sell their product and if you don't like it, you are in the wrong and not cool, or worse ... you are not politically correct!
And not quite the same, but a similar path takes place here ... where sometimes I feel like that I can not say anything right, or have an opinion because I am not a part of the "core", or the "click" ... and therefore not as important, or the things I say have no value ... it's like asking you ... how do you want a truth to come to you? ... with a Mack Truck? with a feather? with a kick in the ass? with an expansive divorce? ... you choose ... and that would suggest that sometimes, what someone is saying, or writing, is not important ... and its value is ignored ... making the ability to get through, for ANY artist, much harder ... but it also tells you something that Sociology 101 teaches you ... the click doesn't change and doesn't like to add people either!
Did you realize what a double entendre this is?
Tommy was BLIND ... and the whole thing was about us all opening our eyes out ... and seeing and appreciating what was out there right in front of us ... but we have so many filters in front of us, that seeing anything is almost impossible ... you can NOT compute enough and that fast ... it's that simple.
There was a film that was magnificent that in many ways showed this ... it was "The Man Who Fell To Earth" ... and it showed Davie Bowie looking at so many tv's at the same time that you and I could not count fast enough ... in the end, stuff like that hurts our perception and our ability to see things clearly ... because we tend to be "influenced" by something or other almost all of the time. It was at that time, that I knew that the media had killed the hippie days, and made us all look dirty, sick, drugged out and pathetic, to ensure that "their version of right" was the correct thing to do. And of course ... they killed most of the music ... but it was too late for the big ones to be killed ... they had already given their lives "for us". How? ... They stuck to their work ... so hard, that we didn't see them fighting that same establishment ... that you are fighting now!
This is specially hard for kids ... and the only way to grow is to shut it all off and find an avenue to do so with, and this could be one of the arts or something else, and sometimes religion, or a spiritual path of some kind helps ... but it does not take away the truth of the stuff in front of you ...
I think that you are making an assumption that other bands are not making an income and are not trying.
The fact of the matter is that things have changed. And today's musicians only need to know that there is no Yellow Brick Road until the day you die, when you might have a good enough perspective to see what you have lived through.
That means that today, you have to do something else ... get on the road and go after it.
It has nothing to do with "progressive" music or "jazz" or "blues" ... or anything else ... it has to do with your own internal belief in the music you are playing ... and when you are not defined enough within, you will have a harder time making a point out there that will grab some attention.
IF, I have a complaint, about too many of the "prog" bands, is that they are not studied enough, and learned enough, to even know ... that they can do more than just a few songs ... because it is all they know. You can sit down and learn most songs fast, and Rock Band helps now ... the problem is, you can NOT make it out there, if you don't know where you are inside with that instrument of yours on your hands ... and the minute you do, you would not give a cahoot about Lady Bruhaha any more than you would a Porn Star, or a Movie Star ... well ... check that .. you can always sleep with them and it might make you feel more important as a star of some sort ...
Old habits die hard! .... we couldn't possibly conceive that the new line up could do something as good or better!
I guess we don't know King Crimson very well, either!
The only suggestion I would like to make is ... do something because it is your love ... not because of the money ... remember ... you can not stop the human spirit and the money? ... someone else will steal it, or take it anyway ... but you need to keep the "insides" clean and looking to do more of what you see ... and do not look back, or stop to look back, or worry about what's back there ... and anyone trying to stop you ... has little chance.
Art ... for us on the inside ... is like this ... I don't need someone to tell me if it is good or bad ... I just do it ... because that person is not the definition of my work or my inner light!
Again ... as I like to say ... it's all about "you" ... and the past is over. Forget YES, forget Jon ... forget everything else ... and just be you. Doesn't mean that once in a while I would not stop by the funeral spot, and place a flower ... and at that moment, you can say thank you, and shed a tear or two ... but the minute you leave, it's a new day ... a new life ... a new song ... and the rest be damned for trying to stop you!
Now you know about Pedro! ... something that I write about in here, that most do not understand and sometimes think I am too stuck up ... and in the end, it has nothing to do with "stuck up" at all ... not to mention I'm not gay!  ------------- Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com |
Posted By: leonalvarado
Date Posted: March 31 2011 at 16:19
|
[QUOTE=moshkito]I think that you are making an assumption that other bands are not making an income and are not trying.[quote] I'm not making that assumption at all! I had recorded two albums, and have promote them as much as I could through this forum as well as through facebook, myspace, reverbnation, lastfm, discogs, its own website, a few radio interviews, some press reviews. I sank a lot of my money and yet to see the breaking even point which is all I'm looking for. I will be making more music in the future. It is something I enjoy. However, there are costs associated with trying to put put the best product you can. I've worked with Abbey Road Studios, I've worked with Metropolis Mastering in London. I've worked with Ty Tabor (kings-X) and John Goodsall (Brand X) plays the guitar on my song as well as Bill Bruford's playing on the drum tracks. It is not easy or cheap to record music when there are many people like that involved. Despite the costs, I managed to put the music out because it was something I love. I'm just baffled by the fact that somebody like a thirteen-year-old girl can make $26K with a song that is horrible and yet, at the same time, somebody who put his sweat and soul (not to mention his own money) to come up with a decent record, can't seem to catch a break. All I'm looking for is the opportunity to cover most of my expenses (I'm not even all of them). [QUOTE=moshkito]The only suggestion I would like to make is ... do something because it is your love ... not because of the money ... remember ... you can not stop the human spirit and the money? ... someone else will steal it, or take it anyway ... but you need to keep the "insides" clean and looking to do more of what you see ... and do not look back, or stop to look back, or worry about what's back there ... and anyone trying to stop you ... has little chance.[quote] I do the music because of love. That doesn't mean I can't be realistic does it? Love doesn't pay for studio time or for top notch musicians. What I'm looking is for people to go check it out and listen to the stuff. Then if they like it, I would like for them to buy the Cd or download the music. At the end, the more people buy, the more I will be able to offer musically. Just because I love doing it doesn't mean that ten years down the road I would like to be tens of thousands of dollars in the red. Love or no love, that would not make much sense, or would it? Regarding the "core" or the "click" on these forums, I agree to the extend that I'm not in the "click" and therefore some of my postings go unnoticed. It bothers me a bit because I do find some people being somewhat snobbish when in fact they do not know who really is at the end of a thread. I may not be a household name but I know enough people within the industry as I have done work for many progressive acts like YES, Jethro Tull, Genesis, Jeff Beck and Deep Purple among many. The whole point of my initial posting had to do with people ignoring the music and concentrating on the semantics instead of on the sound of the music itself. Like I said before, I have seen YES at least ten times but the last concert I went (last month or so) was one of the best concerts I've seen from them. "Close to the Edge" just sounded incredible. Perhaps the new lineup won't be able to put out any better music than they did with Anderson. But for the music's sake, I hope they can. At least better material than what they did for the Keys to ascension and up albums (not my favourite YES period). If the new lineup can do anything at least as good as Drama, then we will all benefit from that. It is about the music :)
|
Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: April 01 2011 at 09:11
I'm amazed by the obtuseness of your responses. People are buying it even though it's "bad" because it's funny. I don't know if you live in a no fun zone or what, but we humans have a feeling called "laughter". This is generally regarded as an enjoyable experience and humans are often willing to pay money to elicit it. You might as well be chastising people for watching Plan 9 From Outer Space because it's not The Godfather. Comparing media to physical objects is impossible and misses the point. And her album is probably going to tank, anyway, because it will be too self-aware. The reason Friday organically spread so much faster than a song by The Lonely Island is its naive sincerity. That can't be now that she knows the entire internet hates her.
This is not true, but this "fact" is the basis of your whole argument. If you're going to make the massive leap of claiming that music has intrinsic worth (which it does not), you should at least pick someone more universally regarded than The Who as something everyone should be listening to. And I was using the term classic rawk as an expression of my dislike for rock played on the radio, which you seem to share. So lol. ------------- if you own a sodastream i hate you |
Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Date Posted: April 01 2011 at 09:37
|
The Who should be taught in schools because kids should care about them. They are the foundation of western civilization.
------------- "One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. " |
Posted By: leonalvarado
Date Posted: April 01 2011 at 10:28
|
To Henry Plainview, You are a funny man. I'm more amazed about your responses than you are about mine. And yes, "Plan 9 from outer space" is a ridiculously done film that is funny because it is so bad. I still wouldn't pay one penny to buy a copy of it. I may not laugh at the same silly things than you do but I'm more than fine with that. In Rebecca's case, why even pay when you ca watch it for free on You Tube? Believe me, Rebecca's parents are laughing louder than those who paid for their daughter's silly song. According to you The Who is not universally regarded enough. Let's see, they have been around since 1964, they have sold more than 100 million albums. They created the first rock opera. They had three wide-released theatrical movies (Quadrophenia, Tommy, The Kids Are Alright). They headlined the original Woodstock music festival. They are one of the most influential rock groups ever. They are in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, the UK Music Hall of Fame, and won the first annual Freddie Mercury Lifetime Achievement in Live Music Award. They also are the recipients of a LIfetime Achievement Award from the British Phonographic Industry and a Lifetime Achievement Award from the Grammy Foundation. They are ranked #3 on About.com's top 50 classic rock bands. They also have seven albums on Rolling Stone's 500 Greatest Albums of ALL Time. Ranked #2 on "Classic Rock's" 50 Best Live Acts of All Time. Ranked #9 on VH1's 100 Greatest Artist of all time. So regarding to your obtuse view on The Who, they are all I have said and then some. You can ask Robert Plant, Jimmy Page, Brian May, The Jam, The Stooges, David Bowie, The Raspberries and even Cheap Trick about them. They'll tell you about how universally regarded are The Who. Are you for real? |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: April 01 2011 at 11:00
|
I've been staring blankly at this thread on and off for a couple of days, between obvious distractions, trying to get worked up enough to have an opinion worthy of a post, and I can't. The problem is, and I have said this afore, we are talking about two different markets comprising of two different audiences. Regardless of how much we lament the piddling size of our niche compared to the ocean of people who are willing to shell-out cash on the latest YouTube meme, the two will never meet, they will never overlap, regardless of talent or skill, good or bad, education or appreciation. It has always been that way. Back in the heyday of Prog the audience was not the same audience that bought Bay City Rollers and Osmond's records. The audience that could be buying Prog today are not those buying into the Rebbecca Black trainwreck, that "lost" audience is buying other things - of other "serious" and "non-commercial" releases that also never bother any Billboard chart but just aren't Prog - things like Animal Collective and Fleetfoxes, or one of the plethora of wayward Indie and Alt rock releases that sell 10,000 copies of their latest to their loyal following. The pond that Prog ripples in is a big pond of millions of little shoals of fish of various, erm, varieties - people who buy Billboard top-40 don't fish (or swim) in that pool. ------------- What? |
Posted By: leonalvarado
Date Posted: April 01 2011 at 11:40
|
Dean, You are correct in your assertion. My original posting is based on my frustrations in trying to get noticed. The not-so-obvious point that I was making has more to do with the fact that people will gravitate very quickly towards the silly, the mediocre and the controversial. Like someone pointed out somewhere in this thread, people like things that do not require any mental investment from their part. I understand the reason. It doesn't detract me from thinking that it is somewhat ridiculous. The only way to see that is for one to look at it from an outsider's point of view. For my argument, that will be my point of view. But hey, it is one man's opinion. I'm not trying to compare markets and niches on my posting. I'm making a quick generalisation (and although people hate the idea of generalising, it is the one of the biggest tools used by statistics to get to at least a hypothesis). As a whole, the music industry and how people react to it is changing very fast. With the new availability for technology, people can achieve things they weren't be able to do before. This can be a good thing but also can be a terrible thing. Discerning what's good and what's bad is a matter of opinions. However, being that this is a forum for progressive rock, I thought it would be appropriate to comment from the point of view of a progressive rock artist as well as a listener. I would have thought that there would be more common ground among the people in the forums. It seems as if I was wrong with that assertion. Forums create instant opportunities to create counter points. Moreover, people get gutsier when they don't have to face their "opponents" in person. I think we all get the jest of it. However, sometimes some people like just to interject for the sake of interjecting. They seem to enjoy just stirring-up the pot to see what happens. I get that too, although it does get on the way of a productive argument. At the end, I still have all the same thoughts I had when I original posted the thread. I'm still upset that a thirteen year old can sell tons of copies of what it is basically just a silly song (estimates now stand at $50,000). But then again, there are not one but three "Jackasses" movies and they all made money. I still can't comprehend that neither.
|
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: April 01 2011 at 11:46
|
I see a rant by a man who can't sell his music and feels that the entire world is upside down. Yes, I also don't like the pop music of today (with some exceptions, very pop exceptions) and I probably wouldn't have liked the pop music of 30 years ago. The Who? Why the hell do I have to know who the who is? I know it and I don't like them, period. If young people today like bullsh*t there are tons of reasons and it's sad (maybe) but good music is still being made and sold today. The problem is that, for some people, we should go back to the eras when a few giant bands where in the spotlight, almost becoming mainstream. But were there all the channels that you have today to sell and promote music? Was there an internet, an Amazon in the 70's? No. Today there is A LOT of progressive rock music being written, heard and sold in all many channels. If something, music has become much more accesible. Now any geek with a guitar can set up a fictitious one-man prog band in his bedroom, record in his mac and call it a prog-project. And if he's good, maybe someone will notice. That Rebecca Black's parents had the money to pay for the little dream of their daughter actually makes me rather happy instead of envious. And, by the way, today IS Friday. ------------- 
|
Posted By: leonalvarado
Date Posted: April 01 2011 at 12:10
|
The T, I do think the whole world is upside down but not because I can't sell enough records. However, I must point out again that I find it strange to read so many responses about other music. Is not this the "PROGARCHIVES"? As in progressive rock? I would think promoting progressive rock and it's history would be one of the pints in these forums. It is not about going back to any era. It is about the music. It just happens to be that the best prog-rock was written in the past and not necessarily today. Perhaps there are some brilliant prog-rock being hammer out these days but most people wouldn't know it because it doesn't get the same attention as Rebecca Black. Also, I don't chastise Rebecca for her actions. I actually think she just did what she wanted to. I said so in my original post. I just have a hard time believing that people have ponied up $50,000 on her song specially when you can get it for free. And speaking of free, I'm free to think that is a dumb move in the part of those people. The same as you being free to be a special collaborator for a progressive rock forum without liking or even acknowledging The Who and their influence in progressive rock. |
Posted By: harmonium.ro
Date Posted: April 01 2011 at 12:11
Good post T. But there are a few giants in the spotlight today, too, the only problem when claiming that on PA is that here we only have their haters. 
|
Posted By: harmonium.ro
Date Posted: April 01 2011 at 12:16
| LOL, I don't believe people here are giving more attention to the music of Rebecca Black (not her music anyway, but let's forget that) that to the music of today's prog bands. There is a certain amount of attention she gets here, indeed, but she gets it as the subject of an internet phenomenon (which has little to do with the music, which is the pretext; and the phenomenon starts by acknowledging how stupid is her music in the first place). |
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: April 01 2011 at 12:18
What you are asking is not just "progarchives" to promote prog music (which is understandable) but the ENTIRE MUSIC WORLD. You make the error: you put your prog music and Rebecca Black's song as if they were aimed at the same segment of the population. "Friday" got popular because is atrocious, not because it stole listeners away from progressive rock. The best defense for prog-rock's long-term sustainability is people who like it continuing to like it and supporting it, and bands being adventurous and continuing making music; you will not save prog-rock by trying to make it an iTunes sensation because it will not happen, period. I am a special collaboratr of this website becuase i have contributed much more than you will ever do. And because I love a LOT of progressive rock bands, not because I HAVE to like the sacred cows of rock any more; I haven't said I don't acknowledge The Who's infuence on rock; they were very influential. I'm just bored like hell when I have to listen to them. And I'm quite more concerned (though, again, it's really irrelevant) that people have no clue about who Bach is that who The Who is... I'm more concerned that people have no clue about what western civilization was founded on than on people ignore who the hell Keith Moon was... Live with what you have, try to improve, that's it. -------------
|
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: April 01 2011 at 12:19
DT, The Mars Volta, Porcupine Tree, etc... They're quite popular aren't they? Prog is actually much more popular today, if not in the mainstream, it sells TONS more. -------------
|
Posted By: leonalvarado
Date Posted: April 01 2011 at 12:23
| harmonium, you hit it in the head with "internet phenomenon". The somewhat disturbing thing is that it does start by acknowledging how silly her music is. That's all fine. Common sense would dictate that because of that there would be some buzz created around it. Now, the whole thing is available for all to see and hear on You Tube. So, do people need to go somewhere and pay to download this thing? That's the phenomena right there. I'm just saying. |
Posted By: harmonium.ro
Date Posted: April 01 2011 at 12:26
No - the phenomena is that we poke fun at her and use the "meme" in as many situations as possible until it gets really tired. I can vouch that no PA member will go and buy the song. |
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: April 01 2011 at 12:29
It costs 0.99 cents, to have a laugh with somebody might be worth more than other stuff for some people. I wouldn't vouch anything because I don't like to say that all prog fans are so predictable and repetitive. We are as liable to be stupid or make stupid decisions or like stupid things as much as any other guy. -------------
|
Posted By: harmonium.ro
Date Posted: April 01 2011 at 12:31
Prog fans are cheap - look at all the prog festivals and labels that are closing down.  Yeah, we'll go and see it on YouTube, but not buy it.
|
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: April 01 2011 at 12:34
|
Please don't think "we" applies to us all.... We here in PA like music, that's all we can say its the same about all of us. We will find somebody... -------------
|
Posted By: harmonium.ro
Date Posted: April 01 2011 at 12:39
|
You don't like a bit of rhetoric retort, I gather Anyways it's friday, friday and I'm going out to buy |
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: April 01 2011 at 12:41
|
Fun, fun, think about fun You know what it is I got this, you got this My friend is by my right, ay I got this, you got this Now you know it" You are a fail if you fail to understand the magic, the art behind these lyrics...
-------------
|
Posted By: leonalvarado
Date Posted: April 01 2011 at 12:46
|
T, If all it takes is for you to write more stuff than others to become a special collaborator, then don't worry. You are very safe as far as I am concern. Also, what my original posting does is to take a look at people's reaction in buying music as they ignore the one type of rock that most people in these forums love (that would be progressive rock). I am merely pointing out that people rather listen to some silly song than some decent prog-rock. I'm not in the camp that progressive music has to be for an elitist group of people although many times that's the impression I get from some people in these forums. As far as how much the music sales today. Pink Floyd= 200 million albums sold, Genesis = 150 million albums sold, Queen (not full time prog but enough at the beginning)= 300 million albums sold, Jethro Tull= 60 million albums sold, ELO= 50 million albums sold, Rush 40 million, etc. Those numbers can't be touched by today's prog-bands. Their music might be excellent but the record sales are very dim in comparison. At any rate, I think we are getting of the subject here. I wrote the thread to touch various points but the general issue had to do with people opting to buy mediocrity as opposed to something that they may enjoy much more in the long run. This whole thing of "I contribute more than you'll ever do" is just silly. I don't care much for that. Enjoy your Friday.
|
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: April 01 2011 at 12:56
-------------
|
Also, what my original posting does is to take a look at people's reaction in buying music as they ignore the one type of rock that most people in these forums love (that would be progressive rock). I'm quite sure most people on THIS forum will prefer prog songs to "Friday". I am merely pointing out that people rather listen to some silly song than some decent prog-rock. Who are you to judge what others (and I'm talking about people in and mostly outside of PA) should like? If they like a sh*tty stupid song because it makes them happier than the 20 minute perorations of Jon Anderson about purple clouds, good for them. It doesn't affect you does it? I'm not in the camp that progressive music has to be for an elitist group of people although many times that's the impression I get from some people in these forums.Some people believe that, true. 
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: April 01 2011 at 12:58
There is little common ground among Prog fans because of the diversity of the music - the Who vs Beatles thread of a few years back demonstrated that the division of opinion that was prevalent in the 60s still lives on today. Even with the numbers of people who frequent this forum, and those that regularly buy "Prog" albums, there isn't a common buying profile - it's fragmented and sub-niched. Even http://www.progarchives.com/album.asp?id=21270" rel="nofollow - Nick D'Virgilio Genesis tribute album sold to a divided market comprising of some of those that like Genesis and D'Virgilio and Spock's Beard and Big Big Train and some of all permutations of those that don't like Genesis or D'Virgilio or Spock's Beard or Big Big Train; but it would not have sold to all. So extrapolating that to any band within the sphere of Prog the people who will be attracted towards it will be those who share a degree of commonality, or those whose interest has been piqued by some related comment or review, but it cannot be taken for granted that anyone will actually buy any of it.
I believe the identification of correct markets is totally relevant and pertinent, so Rebbecca Black pocketing $50K is immaterial since it didn't come from the pockets of people who could buy Prog albums. Those people prefer to buy Biffy Clyro, The xx and Funeral For A Friend albums instead. Any increase in popularity of Prog as a genre will come from people who currently buy those "serious" indie albums who can make the connection between those bands and Prog (and vice versa).
Anyone who has met me in person will attest to the fact that I'm far more gutsier (ie aggressive and demonstrative) IRL than in the rarefied atmosphere of a Prog forum, though equally as opinionated. Since I'm careful in keeping those two populations separate, that's difficult to prove  ------------- What? |
Posted By: leonalvarado
Date Posted: April 01 2011 at 13:51
|
I like the way you think. It is quite different from many of the people I read about on these forums. I do find the crowd to be polarising. Actually, I do feel that there is some kind of click within these forums that if you are not a part of, then you are dismissed altogether. I don't frequent this site but from time to time I check in to see what's new. I have always found some resistance to whatever I write. Yes, I agree that this particular thread invites polarising responses. I'm OK with that. I don't see Rebecca Black's pocketing $50,000 as immaterial. Mainly because it has nothing to do with her. It has to do with people spending money on mediocre entertainment as a reflection where we are headed. Did I mentioned three "Jackasses" movies? I learned a whilst back about progressive rock buying audiences on my first album which happened to be a Genesis tribute album. I found out that people either loved it or hated it. Sometimes it didn't even had to do with the music. Just the fact that I "dared" to re-record the sacred anthems. I just wanted to make my own takes on some of the music I loved so much. Steve Hackett liked it, that was good enough for me. But it is very hard for many people to get past the fact that it wasn't Genesis doing Genesis. That also baffles me but what the hell, I moved on anyway. When Phil Collins finally bowed out of Genesis, the remaining guys came out with a pretty decent album. "Calling All Stations" may not be in the same vein as "Selling England By The Pound" but musically speaking, it was better than the two preceding albums which had Collins in them. People dismissed it, specially in the States and the band dissolved. I for one, would had enjoyed at least one or two more albums with the last lineup but they couldn't make people get passed the fact that Phil Collins wasn't in Genesis anymore. Yes is going through some of the same. Will see what happens when their new album comes out in July. Until then, there are many fans berating Chris Squire and Steve Howe for not having Jon Anderson in the band. I bet most of them would shut up if the current lineup would agree to play in their backyard just for beers. I bet they would quickly covert to being fans of the new lineup. What motivates progressive rock fans is actually more complex than what I can put in a few lines. I am still trying to figure it out enough to get some notice (for my music and not for my rants, I got the latter down).
|
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: April 01 2011 at 14:35
|
^ re-recording classics is a toughie - even previous Genesis members (Hackett "Revisited" and D'Virgilio "Rewired") didn't receive unanimous praise from all Genesis fans for doing that so you're in good company.
Line-up changes are also a toughie, especially when a "classic" lineup created a "classic" album. You don't read too many people complaining that Peter Banks or Tony Kaye aren't touring with Yes at the moment - I find that "selectiveness" a little puzzling myself, but I guess every one has their favourite "ideal" line up. However, bands with revolving door membership policies like King Crimson or Deep Purple manage to ride over such criticisms - it helps when the later albums equal or surpass their "classic". ------------- What? |
Posted By: harmonium.ro
Date Posted: April 01 2011 at 14:57
I don't think a fan of the The xx would buy a Rebbeca Black album 
|
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: April 01 2011 at 15:09
------------- What? |
Posted By: Negoba
Date Posted: April 01 2011 at 15:13
|
Who the hades is Rebecca Black? ------------- You are quite a fine person, and I am very fond of you. But you are only quite a little fellow, in a wide world, after all. |
Posted By: harmonium.ro
Date Posted: April 01 2011 at 15:18
It's a bit difficult to follow but I think I got it now, sorry.  |
Posted By: leonalvarado
Date Posted: April 01 2011 at 15:27
|
The Peter Banks/Tony Kaye example is a good one even though they are each pretty good musicians on their own. Tony was the original keyboardist on great songs such as "Starship Trooper", "Yours is no disgrace" and "Perpetual Change". His style of playing is more one of setting the atmosphere rather than flashing virtuosity. I can't disagree with the fact that Wakeman ended being a better fit for the band but Tony did OK during his time with Yes. He is actually better than most people give him credit. I like some of the things he's done with Billy Sherwood who also happens to be very talented. I speak with him from time to time and he is always busy doing a new project. John Wetton's new album being the latest. As for Peter Banks, I don't know much of what he does these days. I know more than once he tried to start a tour playing the music of Yes from the first album but financials haven't added up on his favour. Regarding the music produced by various lineups in bands, I hope that the upcoming Yes album is a good one. Like many, I am a bit skeptical about it and cautiously optimistic but, I hope they hit it out of the park. really, is the best thing that could happen to the music we love so much.
|
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: April 01 2011 at 15:33
|
^ little know factette - Tony Kaye played Yes's version of Simon & Garfunkel's America live - he'd left by the time they recorded the studio version for the Atlantic compilation "New Age of Atlantic", the arrangement was Kaye's not Wakeman's. ------------- What? |
Posted By: Negoba
Date Posted: April 01 2011 at 15:55
I watched this on youtube...
So you make yourself an amateur song, make an amateur video, put it on youtube for your friends to see...is there anything wrong with that?
I must say there's a lot of people being very mean to a kid who was doing what about half the people on this board do...make music in their basement (or backyards) for fun.
Some sarcastic pimply nerds make fun of it and it goes viral.
I don't know, as a father of daughters, it makes me feel protective. Probably more to it than I've had time to look up yet. ------------- You are quite a fine person, and I am very fond of you. But you are only quite a little fellow, in a wide world, after all. |
Posted By: leonalvarado
Date Posted: April 01 2011 at 16:10
|
Negoba,
There is nothing wrong with what the kid did. I also have not one but two daughters. It is not about her. It is about those who instead of just going to You Tube to check what all the fuzz is about, decided instead to pay for it to the tune of $50,000 dollars so far. Am I the only one who sees something wrong with this? (Maybe I am)  |
Posted By: harmonium.ro
Date Posted: April 01 2011 at 16:17
|
^ I'll give you a firm YES |
Posted By: Negoba
Date Posted: April 01 2011 at 16:25
|
50,000 people out of the tens of millions of people who checked out the youtube thought "Yeah for a dollar I'll have that on my iPod" (perhaps to make fun of, perhaps to play at a party where I bet it will get people's attention).
It's an interesting thought experiment more for me to wonder what I'd do with the situation. If something with my daughter went viral for wierd reasons, I'd be inclined to stop feeding it (though of course once it's out there, it's no longer yours, and you have to let what happens happens or you'd eat yourself up.) That means it never would have made it to iTunes. (I have songs available on iTunes, BTW.) But in the case, I'd probably have tried to shut the thing down to the extent I could.
------------- You are quite a fine person, and I am very fond of you. But you are only quite a little fellow, in a wide world, after all. |
Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: April 01 2011 at 16:27
Unfortunately, yes.
I am 100% certain that everyone who bought the song had already heard it on Youtube. The people who bought it did not see it as mediocrity. They bought it to inflict on other people/ironically enjoy at any time, without internet access. It is fine if you don't find it funny enough to pay a whole dollar for it (that's as much as a can of soda!!), but you have no right to chastise people who do. ------------- if you own a sodastream i hate you |
Posted By: Earendil
Date Posted: April 01 2011 at 16:33
| I don't think you can generalize by saying that no one knows who these older bands are though. At my school, many people listen to The Who. And I have plenty of friends who listen to Pink Floyd and Rush. Sure, there are some groups of young people "with the attention span of a fly on speed", but it can't all be generalized. I certainly don't associate myself with the whole mainstream scene. In fact, I'd say that type of person is the minority considering all of the other social groups who have deeper interests in music, literature, film, art, etc. Interest in thought-provoking, creative music will never be lost. |
Posted By: leonalvarado
Date Posted: April 01 2011 at 19:52
|
I have a right to an opinion. You may not like it but it is my opinion. I'm sure there are many things you find stupid in people. Just because you don't always express them doesn't mean that you don't think them. At any rate, I doubt that anything I write here will change people's minds. It obviously hasn't worked with yours.
|
Posted By: leonalvarado
Date Posted: April 01 2011 at 21:31
|
Sure you can generalise. I gather you are rather young yourself. That's cool. In your case and others like you, it doesn't apply. Generalisations are just what people use to come up with conclusions for a particular data. Generalisation is basically another word for averaging a sample. Sure you don't think that I actually meant for no one young to realise who some of the bands were. I understand the implications my argument takes. Apparently I wrongly assumed that most people on these forums would understand where I'm coming from. Instead, they are taking it as a personal attack of one form or another. I have already being accused to not having a sense of humour and I guess also for not "contributing" enough to get some sort of special title. Never mind my actual musical contributions or all of the artwork that I've done throughout the last twenty or so years which are, in most people's minds, real contributions to the genre. Look it is simple. My rant is not about personal issues and therefore I have to generalise. Otherwise I would be also accused of character assassination. I'm just stating my opinion. Have you seen the opinions of people towards the new YES lineup? You would think they want Chris Squire's head on a stick. How about Phil Collins selling out Genesis for a quick buck? Or Pink Floyd sucking because Roger Waters wasn't there. In the end I'm glad that many people in the school listen to The Who. That makes me happy because I like The Who. I did some work once for John Entwistle. Meeting him was actually quite humorous. He showed up with a lady who would basically repeat anything I would say to him. He then would muttered some gargled sounds to the woman who in turn would repeat what he said in a form of English that I was able to understand. This went on back and forth for the duration of the conversation. I swear if I had a gun pointed at my head I could not understand anything that he would say. At the end we all sort of laughed out loud (I certainly did and he at least smiled). Please take the thread for what it is, just an opinion. Frank Zappa once said: "Why do you necessarily have to be wrong just because a few million people think you are?" He also said: "Most people wouldn't know good music if it came up and bit them in the ass". My point? Just opinions, nothing to fret about and nothing to point out "who gives me the right to, balh blah, blah" as someone else on the thread already has. Be cool!
|
Posted By: leonalvarado
Date Posted: April 01 2011 at 21:38
|
Last comment was directed at Eärendil. The one before that was directed to the Henry Plainview. The fact that my posts did not come attached with the appropriate quotes just shows how little I know on how to use this thing. I know, it makes me some sort of dinosaur but I don't really do these forums often. Today was an exceptionally slow day that gave me more time in my hands that I usually get. Whew! I wonder how many times a day do some of the people with thousands of post do it? When do they find the time?
|
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: April 01 2011 at 21:43
|
Look Leonelalvarado, thanks to you I bought the damn song for 99 cents to make fun to my girlfriend. I'll probably never hear it again after the time when I surprised her with it and got a huge laugh from it. It gave me 5 good minutes. That's enough. Now put your songs in youtube or iTunes and I'll gladly check if I can get enjoyment out of it, either by ridicule like with Friday or by actual musical/intellectual enjoyment like I do with tons and tons of music which not always are prog. -------------
|
Posted By: leonalvarado
Date Posted: April 01 2011 at 21:46
I'm sorry if you spent your 99¢ in the song. Don't take it so personally. I only wish my daughter would have come up with such video. It would have saved my over $40,000 in college tuition. By the way, lighten up. I can't believe people here are telling me that I'm the one with no sense of humour. Go watch the guy at the end of 60 minutes. He rants a lot.
|
Posted By: leonalvarado
Date Posted: April 01 2011 at 21:56
Cool! You can find my songs in iTunes. Just search for Leon Alvarado in the iTune store and it should all come up. You are funny though. I like that. You can listen to full versions of some of the songs here: http://www.reverbnation.com/leonalvarado Have fun either way (by ridicule or by actual musical/enjoyment). |
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: April 01 2011 at 22:23
|
^I just bought Strange Places. I hope the enjoyment is on the good side .
EDIT: Heard it twice already. Good enjoyment. I reviewed it on iTunes (though the review doesn't appear yet). BUT you CAN't expect that kind of music to have anything to do with the market for Rebecca Black's magnum opus -------------
|
Posted By: Earendil
Date Posted: April 01 2011 at 22:39
I respect your opinion. Especially because people in general could be a lot less fickle and stupid. |
Posted By: crimhead
Date Posted: April 01 2011 at 23:20
Rebecca Black > Lady Gaga ROFL!!!! Pop is Dead. Long live Rock.(Apologies to Pete Townsend) |
Posted By: rogerthat
Date Posted: April 02 2011 at 00:56
|
Pop - and really, really bad pop at that - is a separate market from that of prog and that has always been the reality. Barbara Streisand's debut was also a blockbuster and even if she might be, at least imo, heaps better as a singer than many contemporary divas, that was surely staid and conservative next to some of the exciting things going on in the 60s. There have always been people who'd rather listen to Leonard Cohen than The Who and whatever may be the former's undeniable appeal for some sections of the audience, I don't see that as something taking rock/pop music places which The Who did. With that being said, I'd like to bring up a point which seems to have been evaded in this discussion (or maybe I missed it!  ). Music's place in popular culture and society is surely sinking and has been in decline for sometime. With the advent of computers, video gaming and so many other distractions, music as a source of entertainment has become less relevant or appealing. It's therefore not surprising that the one which grabs the most eyeballs wins in the commercial sweepstakes. I am writing to you - the threadstarter, sorry couldn't get your userid - from thousands of miles away in India and here too, genius in composition or virtuosity in singing was valued and celebrated much, much more in years past than it is now. People must be apologetic for the present era to deny it. Yes, there are people who still have an ear for quality in music (and I am NOT getting into any long argument about the subjectivity of quality here!) but I am, as you are, referring to the general demographic here. The general demographic is after all important to sustain a business and to pay musicians for their work. Millions of copies of sales for left-field music is not sustainable anymore because people have found new toys to play with and don't have the time anymore. That is to say, if it may be unsavoury of what is seen as a golden era of rock music, it is likely that if the same distractions had existed then in the 70s too, very many of those millions of listeners may not have after all bought those albums because these would have fascinated them more than the music. To compound matters, there are many more artists releasing their work through various means today so grabbing eyeballs is that much harder, in a very divided and fragmented fanbase. My suggestion - it may be something that you've already considered, nevertheless... - is to do what this guy Cert1fied who writes intermittently here does. He derives actual samples of live instrument playing from recorded songs (like THAT bass tone in Tom Sawyer, just as an example), loads them into what I believe is a MIDI keyboard and plays his own original parts with these tones on the keyboard. The effect is pretty good, I must say. He was last seen searching for an elusive NWOBHM guitar tone. As you said, there are costs involved in hiring fine musicians to play on a record and if the economics doesn't work out, it is surely better to opt for something like this than to not make music at all, which would be a shame (some prominent neo prog musician took that step recently). It then doesn't pinch your wallet and you still have the satisfaction of making the kind of music you want to and not submit to the world of Rebbeca Black. And if somebody decides to buy your song just for fun, you get to keep the money too.
|
Posted By: leonalvarado
Date Posted: April 02 2011 at 11:06
Well, I'm glad you liked it. And no, I don't expect to be in the same market for the Friday song. It was never about specifics. Rebecca's song is musically bad even in her own market. It was never about the music or Rebecca. It is about people willing to spend money in silly things instead of at least looking for something with at least some value. The best argument I read so far against my original post is the one about finding some value in the laughter created by the song. I can see that but, not to the point of spending any money on it. Specially if I could see it for free. As far as Rebecca Black herself, there you go baby! College paid for. It really doesn't get any better than that. I just hope that the mass media doesn't get a hold of her around the talk-show circuit because that sort of thing is usually a bad thing for a kid's mind and ego. Also, people love to build up Cinderella stories as much as they love to destroy the ending. There is a fine line between good exposure and overexposure in an instant-gratification world.
|
Posted By: harmonium.ro
Date Posted: April 02 2011 at 12:46
| There are much, much worse things in the field of commercial music. Have you heard of turbo-folk or manele? |
Posted By: CPicard
Date Posted: April 02 2011 at 12:51
I've heard about Serbian turbo-folk - in a documentary about Milosevic. It was an awkward introduction and I can't say it gave me a huge desire to explore this genre. |
Posted By: harmonium.ro
Date Posted: April 02 2011 at 12:57
|
It's best you stay away from it
|
Posted By: darkshade
Date Posted: April 02 2011 at 13:01
|
Time to chime in i think this has been mentioned before, but im not sure. One of the bigger problems is the lack of exposure for newer acts. Acts that have been around for 40 years are still advertised on TV, radio, internet; even if they're dead (half the Beatles, Elvis, etc..). Newer acts never get their time in the sun. I know a little more than a dozen bands and artists who, 10-15 years ago would have broken out into commercial success, but with the way things are now, they have to work VERY hard to make a living. I'll use the jam band circuit as an example. When Jerry Garcia died in 95, Phish took over as the biggest jam band after the Grateful Dead. When Phish broke up for a hiatus in 2004, Umphrey's McGee were poised to take that mantle, being they were on the rise for a few years before. But with the way the internet was by the time of the middle of the decade, people just kept talking about Phish, and hoping they'd get back together soon, etc. and how Umphrey's McGee were going to take their place as the biggest jam band. But everyone just kept talking about it on forums, but it never happened. Now Phish are back and bigger than ever, never giving a chance for any of the lesser known bands. It's sad really. I can use the same situation as above for different bands, just switch the band names around. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/MysticBoogy" rel="nofollow - My Last.fm 
|
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: May 15 2011 at 16:23
I like this version of "Friday" |