Nevermind The Posers

See ya in the pit.

Do You Feel Auto-Tune Has A Pervasive Negative Effect on Society’s Perception and Consumption of Music? November 16, 2011

Filed under: Music Questions — NVMP @ 8:54 AM

Do you feel that Auto-Tune has a pervasive negative effect on society’s perception and consumption of music?

TNT
Yes, Auto-Tune has a pervasive negative effect on society’s perception of music.  When musicians created music before the days of auto-tune, they were considered talented artists.  What happened?  Today, to have a hit song, it has to have an electronic sound fluffing over the mistakes or notes where the pitch just wasn’t met?  I don’t think so.  I can understand that auto-tune may have a place in society’s music, but it does not need to be the center of attention.  It does not need to define mine or anyone’s musical preference because it is not a talent or art form, it’s pressing a button to modify your voice.  I don’t know how I’d react if someone told me their favorite type of music is anything auto-tuned.  Probably the same way I reacted when I heard Snoop Dog did a song with Katy Perry, nauseated and confused.

Jake Davis
Auto-tune is the lowest form of music, in my opinion.  It takes talent out of the equation, allowing America to focus even more on how people look, dress and act, regardless of what they have to say.  Take any group or artist that regularly uses auto-tune while maintaining their real voice, all you’ll see is how fake they are.  I, of course, excuse techno and electronica because they base their entire sound off of computer generated tones.  For everyone else, it makes them sound tiny and unnatural.  And what happens when they get on stage?  Disaster, pure and simple.  If this doesn’t sway you, think about classic music that stands the test of time.  Frank Sinatra, The Ramones, The Beatles, Black Sabbath are classics because they had true talent and musical ability, not a good team of computer techs behind them.  So, pop artists of today, lay off your sound crew and perhaps get some lyrical and musical rehearsal in, you’ll thank us in the long run.

Orin
Auto-tune haytaz, in the immortal words of T-Pain (from his song, of the same name) “calm the fuck down!”  I believe, in the future, every song will utilize auto-tune.  Imagine the Star Spangled banner!  Oh…wha?  They have that?  Um…you’re saying I can auto-tune anything?  h…I already have the app on my phone, you say? Okay, it’s a bit much… OhhHhHh nOoOoo it’s nooOOooooOTT!!! I LOvve iiiTttt! “U got meE… U got meEEeeee…”

oZ
Yes, auto-tune does affect people negatively.  I feel that auto-tune tracks manipulate the impressionable, unimaginative mind into robotically shaking their body (or buying into) to nonsense with a catchy chorus.  It seems auto-tune produced tracks, are produced in such way to compensate for lack of content, originality, skill or even just inability to sing on key.  However, this does not in any way insinuate that there are no ‘good’ songs made in auto-tune.  After all, auto-tune was created to correct inaccuracy in songs, not to decide if a song is good.  Furthermore, it is used in other ways and at this point is standard in professional studios.

Mark
God YES.  At one point, it had a more understandable purpose.  Let’s say an artist has done 12 takes of a vocal, and the 2nd take is by far the best with the only problem being a few minor note issues (too flat, too low, etc).  To have a program that would allow a producer to keep the best performance while correcting some of the not so great parts would be a godsend, as it was nothing more than a neat and helpful tool to make the mixer’s job easier.  But with the mainstream unveiling of this new technology in Cher’s 1998 single “Believe,” little did music audiences world-wide realize that it had signaled the official beginning of the end for not just talent and perseverance, but for musical integrity.  Not to mention the creating of a gimmick ridden crutch that the industry for some reason refuses to go without, even though it can very well stand on its own without it.  Lacking anything as costly and time-consuming as market research, all one needs to do to find out just where music (not to mention its lazy and complacent audience) currently stands as a whole is to listen to the radio.  It’s nothing but an overproduced, over funded and underwhelming wasteland where auto-tune and its talent-less slaves rule supreme.  I am not sure who is to blame anymore…the industry/producers or the public.  On one hand, there’s the industry and all who function within it, who are responsible for auto-tune being EVERYWHERE, in pop songs, rock (I’m especially talking about you Nickelback), folk, country, etc., with the main culprits not surprisingly being (in my opinion) the shittiest genres of music, R&B (correction: MODERN R&B) and rap.  Why an “artist” who rhymes words together would need his or her voice to be notationally corrected is beyond me.  But apparently, in general a dance track isn’t considered marketable (or danceable unless it is auto-tuned), a rock song isn’t great until the vocals sound unnatural and robotic (way to hate on dance music by using their exact production, assholes) and folk isn’t as down-homey until that vocal sounds “natural”.  Or maybe it’s the audience, who willingly eats this shit day after day without so much as a peep of any sort of displeasure, the only ones speaking up being the pretentious indie snobs, but then again, they always complain, and no one wants to listen to them anyways.  Thank god for music.

Angela
Yes, auto tune has a pervasive negative effect on society’s perception of music.  I find my ear picking up more and more musical phrases adjusted with auto tune.  The radio serves as my main source of music and as a haven for auto tune.  It seems to me that artists rely heavily upon the technology to perfect their work.  As a result, I’m inclined to believe that artists are either so mechanically engineered that their reputation and brand appeal matters far more than their talent, or are so insecure about themselves that producers everywhere are given green lights to massive creative edits.  I’m not entirely sure if this is simply an American pop music type of phenomena or if the music industry is allowing technology to reign supreme over the perfectly flawed organic nature of the human body for a more polished approach.  I understand that it’s a business that requires advertising, marketing and merchandising like any other, however I don’t seem to understand how artists who typically are so passionate about what they do, can sit comfortably existing as fraud.  Additionally, one then must ask what effect this is having on up and coming artists perception of themselves and their work.  Moreover, this affects the listener as it creates unrealistic expectations of the talent.  I have found many a recording artist who can put out a fantastic album but leave stadiums of people disappointed in concert.  If a band or musician decides he or she would like to be nothing more than a packaged deal with a shelf life and a team of song writers, then by all means go ahead and enjoy the ride – just don’t conduct interviews like you take the “art” you create from the depths of your soul and christen the fans with it so that they may be born anew in the melody of your auto-tuned choruses.

Hoverbee
Yes, I feel that auto-tune has a pervasive negative effect on society’s perception and consumption of music.  When it was first used by recording artists as an addition to or an effect on a certain part of the song, it was for creative or expressive purposes.  Now it seems to be used by almost every artist no matter what, even in concert settings.  Auto-tune is just as bad as lip syncing to a prerecorded track.  You don’t actually have to sing, or should I say that with auto-tune, you don’t actually have to know how to sing.  Which means any talentless person can put out a record and have perfect pitch.  The result is shoddy music disguised by technology that the public consumes as if it were the real deal.  Auto-tune is offensive to those musicians with talent who can actually sing and who spend time honing that talent.

Daniel Edward
Auto-tune definitely has a negative effect on perception and consumption of music, but it also depends on what music you listen to.  Too much Top 40 is auto-tuned within an inch of its life, and a lot of real talent (except for Adele) gets lost in the thumping club beats and trash pop.  Auto-Tune has syphoned the need for vocal talent from music.

Klone
The biggest problem with “auto-tune” is that it’s something the public even knows exists at all.  Tantamount to the “movable panel in the back of the Aztec Tomb” (anyone catch the reference?), “auto-tune” is supposed to be a hidden trick up the sleeve of sly studio engineers and editors.  It’s a tool in a music producer’s arsenal of equipment to deliver a high quality product to a demanding public.  It was meant to be used sparingly and to correct particular moments of a singer’s performance that may have faltered during recording (or if the particular singer isn’t really all that talented, but somehow in the ways they will, landed themselves a recording contract).  When considering the expense of studio time, and the editor’s time, if you could fix a momentarily missed key for just the second it happened rather than have the artist record another take, you use the tool.  That said, it is meant to also be something unnoticeable, and the fact that this crutch is now being used as the main attraction, it cheapens the integrity behind the performers.  There was a time before auto-tune where a performer had to bring it or go home.  These days, seems any Joe Shmo can step up to a mic, click the auto-tune on and become the next big thing.  When you think of it in those terms, the ONLY effects on society’s perception and consumption of music has been pervasive and negative…at least, as far as learned appreciators of music like us.  For those who’ve never known music without auto-tune, say anyone 16 and younger, this entire question probably seems silly.  That’s what’s sad.

 

What Is The Funniest Song You’ve Ever Heard? November 6, 2011

Filed under: Music Questions — NVMP @ 10:16 PM

What is the funniest song you’ve ever heard?

TNT
The funniest song I’ve ever heard comes from Liam Lynch’s Fake Songs.  My favorite track is “Still Wasted (from the party last night).”  It paints the picture of a drunken man who is still wasted from the party last night, trying to make it to work the next morning.  Favorite line: “I’m wearin my bed sheets like a cape and a cowboy hat (he’s wasted) and naked.  But if I don’t go to work how will I pay my tab?  I’m wasted (he’s wasted).”  Some other great songs off this album are “SOS,” “Fake David Bowie Song” and “Rock and Roll Whore,” featuring Jack Black.

Jake Davis
As a longtime listener of Weird Al Yankovic and Monty Python, the list goes on and on.  For a more recognizable punk song there is one clear choice, “Franco Un-American” by NOFX.  While dated, the song is about the Bush Administration but not in the typical “fuck you” punk sense.  No, the song is told by a poor slacker who never ever paid attention to politics.  One day, he decides to look at all the issues and punditry this country has, and needless to say he freaks.  So, he goes into detail about how he can’t sleep, eat or think without feeling like the country will sink into the ocean.  A true classic comedy punk song, it speaks to the terrified punk rocker in us all.

Orin
Ten-thousand years bad luck to whoever says “Detachable Penis” or anything from TeamAmerica.  Funniest song I can think off right now is “Hand of the Almighty (God Will Fuck You Up),” by John Butler.  It makes me smile.  You’re gonna have to YouTube it, if you haven’t already.  Oh, and Hanson’s “Mmmbop.”

oZ
The funniest song I have heard (recently) is by a comedian name Jon Lajoie called “Stay at Home Dad.”  This song is particularly hilarious because he actually raps and the lyrics are creative.  The melody reminds of Rage Against the Machine, especially towards the end when he says “That’s right I take care of my children” over the guitar buildup.  It resembles Rage’s “Fuck you I won’t do what you tell me” lyric, but with a positive, completely different twist.

Mark B
“The 12 Pains of Christmas.”  It’s extremely corny, very hacky and utilizes voices and characters that have been made fun of since the beginnings of civilized society.  And yet, every time I hear it, I find myself shaking uncontrollably with laughter.  It’s one of those “it’s so bad it’s good” type of tunes.  Christmas is my favorite holiday, so the song helps me get into the Christmas spirit and makes me a little less of a grouch for the holidays.  Whenever I hear it, I know that the Christmas season is rapidly approaching, and to make with the spending.

Angela
The funniest song I have ever heard most recently is “I Like to F*ck” by Tila Tequila featuring Hot Rod.  The first time I heard it I did not think it was serious.  That was, until it was brought to my attention that this song was a Tila Tequila original; which then made this even funnier, as she really is trying to be a “musician.”  I mean, with such poignant lyrics as, “I like to fuck, suck cock until I hurl/ I like to fuck everybody in the world” how could you not see the Grammy nominations all over that? 

Hoverbee
It’s hard to pick one song that I would classify as the funniest I’ve ever heard, but the song “Debra” by Beck is right up there.  The song is a plea to get with a girl he met at JC Penny named Jenny.  He’d also like to get with Jenny’s sister.  He’s not sure, but he thinks her name is Debra.  A close second is a song called “Hollywood Freaks,” also by Beck and appearing on Midnight Vultures, the same album as “Debra.”  The song starts with the lyrics, “hot milk, hmm tweak my nipple” and continues on to absolute craziness.  

Daniel Edward
I’m gonna say “Peacock” by Katy Perry is one of the funniest (and catchiest) songs I’ve ever heard.  It’s an entire song about wanting to see a gentleman’s ‘peacock’ and how amazing it is when she finally does.

Klone
Hands-down, “Karate” by Tenacious D.  It’s a short but sweet ditty about taking vengeance for betrayed trust, and using karate to do so.  Knowing that Tenacious D is basically a buddy band of Jack Black and Kyle Gass, we know that neither of them can do any karate.  Plus, the ultimate move is “pulling out all your pubic hair”, which is not a move that Mr. Myagi taught Daniel-san.  Hilarious.

 

What do you think Ticketmaster’s fees are really for? August 3, 2011

Filed under: Music Questions — NVMP @ 10:03 PM

***Vans Warped Tour coverage coming soon!***

What do you think Ticketmaster’s (among other ticketing places) service and handling fees are specifically for?

 

TNT

Well, let’s break it down.  There are typically four charges: service charges, building facility charges, processing charges, shipping & handling/e-ticket convenience charge/will call charge.  Service charge =  the fee you pay for using Ticketmaster, aka the way the company makes a pretty penny.  Building facility charges = usually a small fee, but determined by the venue not the Ticketmaster.  I have noticed that venues with a Ticketmaster will call window usually charge this fee.  Processing charges = another clever way for Ticketmaster to make money from your order.  It’s basically a second service charge.  Last but not least, S&H/e-ticket convenience/will call charge = the price you pay to get the ticket in your hand to gain entrance into the show.  Don’t think you can avoid the S&H fee by picking it up at will call or printing the tickets at home, Ticketmaster has covered all angles.  So, 3 out of the 4 charges profit the company.   Now there’s a business plan. 

 

Oz

I truly don’ t believe we will ever know what the fees mysteriously added to ticket sales by Ticketmaster are actually for.  However, my guess is that they are used to pay for the website maintenance, as well as their aggressive marketing providers.  They fail to justify the high costs, explains why they got sewed several times.

 

Daniel-Edward
I’m sure they have some explanation if pressed, but it’s just to rape the wallets of their customers.

 

Mark
Honestly, I still have no idea.  I have genuinely tried to think of what these bullshit added charges are for, as I have scoured for already overpriced seats on the monopoly that is Ticketmaster’s tickethub.  Recently, a plethora of pages have popped up on the internet with descriptions of what the processing fees for are and where they actually go, and yet, when you read them it still FAILS to make any sense.  According to Ticketmaster CEO Nathan Hubbard, “We get it — you don’t like service fees. You don’t like them mostly because you don’t understand what the heck they are for.”  NO SHIT.  But we don’t just dislike them because we don’t know what they are for, we dislike them because they add $15 – $20 or extra money that we don’t have or don’t want to spend on a ticket that is supposed to be $30.  And until recently they never bothered to tell us about these charges until we were close to check-out.  Dick move.  Another exec stated, “Like any business, we have every right to seek a fair return on our investment and efforts”.  Actually, no you don’t.  Not when no one asked them to create the service, no one told them to take these financial risks by investing in these events and Ad space, and no one appreciates their effort but the lousy shareholders.  And there is no fairness involved.  Slamming people over the head with hidden charges and supposed convenience fees is not fair.  They want to know what fair is?  Paying $30 only for a $30 ticket.  Hopefully, Ticketmaster will make like the record industry, and render itself obsolete by overspending, under promoting and fucking everyone out of whatever they can get.

 

Orin
Likely, people are unhappy about the service/handling fees ticket vendors tack on to the already exorbitant price of shows; yet, these average citizens are simply misinformed.  I blame this on faulty advertising.  For example, how many people really know that nearly all the money Ticketmaster takes in is given directly to a series of high-class cocaine and Mercedes dealers in Hollywood?  If we cut these fees, just think of the devastating chain reaction…like the proverbial pebble tossed in the ocean here creating waves in China, cut those fees and we’ll all quickly be drowned by the ensuing tsunami.  Makes perfect logical sense, and why shouldn’t it?  I love Ticketmaster, and suggest others follow suit as I bow down to our new overlord, who certainly always knows what is best for us.  I know it doesn’t matter what I say or do…charge me whatever you want — you own me, master.  All hail Ticketmaster!

 

Angela
I hate these fees.  As far as I’m concerned these fees line the pockets of those dedicated to funding Satan’s campaign for the 2012 election.  Mostly I feel as though these extra fees pay for things like royalties, vendor fees; people have to get paid somehow.  Some of them are a little over the top and leave one angrily shaking fists shouting, “Really?!” but for the most part, they pay for all that extra shit you deal with at a concert.

 

Hoverbee
Providing tickets is a business and most people are in business to make money.  Ticket services like Live Nation and Ticketmaster are playing middleman with the artist and the fans so they expect to get a cut of the dough.  However, big ticketing services like these charge way too much for just playing the go-between.  Hopefully, more artists will opt to use ticketing services with lower fees or get the hint and decide to sell concert tickets direct to fans cutting out the middleman entirely. 

 

 

What Album Best Illustrated Your Days of Teen Angst? July 7, 2011

Filed under: Music Questions — NVMP @ 8:07 AM

Which album or songs best illustrated or described your days of teenage angst?

TNT
The album that best illustrated my days of teenage angst would be The Living End, self-titled album.  I listened to a lot of punk music in my teenage days, but when I listened to The Living End, it just felt different.  Maybe because the band was just getting their name out there with the single “Prisoner of Society.”  Maybe it’s because I informed my friend about this kick ass punk trio.  Maybe it’s because every single song spoke to me, but most of all, it’s because it made me feel like I could do anything in the world at the age of 16. 

Oz
There were many albums from different genres that used to play a soundtrack to my long faded teenage years.  One specific album off top that represents days of teen angst is an album by a band called Vision of Disorder.  The album is self titled and the song name is “Suffer”.  The song challenges the generation gap and its pre-conceived notions and rebels through different type of thinking expressed in the lyrics. 

Daniel-Edward
The one album that best described my days of teen angst was definitely Simple Plan’s No Pads, No Helmets, Just Balls.  Songs like “Addicted” and “Worst Day Ever” perfectly evoked everyday high school teen angst and drama.  I listened to it constantly and knew the words to every song, but I haven’t really listened to any of their music in the past few years.

Mark
At the risk of sounding doom and gloom hacky, I will have to go with the first album that always comes to mind when I think of my teen angst, and that would be the album Violator by Depeche Mode.  It came out when I was seven, and although I was a fan then, the understanding of it would escape me for several more years.  But when I hit my mid-teens, the album as a whole began to take on a new meaning.  Every song seemed to speak to me, matching my moods and describing my pains and disillusionment in a lost precise and explicit detail.  It was almost the torch lighting my way down the path of feelings, which became more and more desolate thanks to girls and teen drama.  I still nearly fall apart when I hear “Enjoy the Silence,” remembering all the times that I listened to it incessantly through all the break-ups of my doomed relationships, and the loneliness that being a teen can bring.  Or “Policy of Truth”, when you deal with all the bullshit your friends can cause, or when you wish everyone would try to see things your way on “World in My Eyes”.  Or the blowing off of steam and having fun while dancing around, and mimicking guitar while listening to “Personal Jesus”.  Sometimes I think that if it weren’t for the Mode, making it through the teen years wouldn’t have been as easy. 

Orin Jones
Pantera’s “Fucking Hostile” takes it.  I don’t expect many kids to remember this one off  of the Vulgar Display of Power album, but maybe.  I must have played this song 900 times a day as loud as my headphones would go, as if by blowing out my eardrums, I was somehow getting back at the man.  (Epiphany: this is probably why I am now FUCKING DEAF.)  I tried listening to this song/album recently and just felt embarrassed…silly lyrics and predictable guitar lines.  Doesn’t mean, however, I won’t still see ’em if they ever come around again…does mean I say “What?” and “Huh?!” more than any other 31 year-old I know. ~R.I.P. Dimebag Darrell.

Angela
Maybe we all knew this was coming, but I searched my mental musical catalog and my pick for teen angst album is Green Day’s Dookie.  I know, typical, but this is the very reason as to why I am the die-hard fan that I am.  Even if I was a little young to quite grasp the meaning behind all the songs like “Chump,” “F.O.D.” and “Burnout” resonated somewhere inside my burgeoning angst and blossomed into the take-no-shit punk rock enthusiast you have today.

Hoverbee
The album that best illustrated my days of teenage angst is The Wall by Pink Floyd.  The core concepts of the album deal with the loss of a father figure, an overbearing mother figure, ridicule by peers and the end of a romantic relationship.  Although the album dealt with certain topics beyond my experience at the time (marriage, adultery, heroin use), the core concepts described the deep anxiety I felt during my adolescence.  I identified with the sincere wish to isolate oneself from the world by building a metaphorical wall.  

Klone
If I had to pick just one, I’d say it was Smashing Pumpkins’ Siamese Dream.  I may not have landed on that one during my teenage years, but thinking back, it’s the perfect mural to reflect my teenage angst.  The disc has a healthy dose of everything from seriously intense, rocking riffs that electrify your body into at least bobbing your head along with the beat, to slow, melancholy power ballads.  (Ahem, “Disarm” anyone?)  Smashing Pumpkins is the kind of band whose genius washes over you and overtime becomes a part of you, and for me, Siamese Dream always takes me back to a more angsty time in my life.  Alice In Chains’ Facelift was a very close second…so close, worth mentioning.

 

Which two bands/musicians should mate to produce musical perfection? June 21, 2011

Filed under: Music Questions — NVMP @ 10:06 PM

Which two bands/musicians should mate to produce musical perfection?


TNT
Hard question!  So many ‘couples’ to theoretically mate for musical perfection.  But for my personal taste, it would have to be the best of both worlds- Jerry Garcia and Joan Jett.  The sound would blend rock, punk, folk and experimental jams.  Yes, the offspring of these musicians could cause a clashing sound, but I am so curious about what that sound would be.  From Jerry Garcia, I would like his phenomenal guitar playing and talented songwriting skills to carry over and from Joan Jett, it would be her attitude and raw vocals with punk influences shining through.  In case you were wondering, I’m hoping for a male offspring.  

Hoverbee
I would like Cake and Duran Duran to musically mate and produce a sound like no other.  I’ve always loved the funky rhythms and bass lines of Duran Duran and the way in which almost every song is somehow pure sex.  Cake can be funky, but has never had that sexual undertone.  I love the crazy, lyrical concoctions of Cake much more than the ambiguous, sometimes confusing lyrics of Duran Duran.  Both bands have horn sections which should stay, but lean more toward the Duran Duran saxophone than the Cake trumpets.  The music should be more toward Duran Duran’s electronic sound yet still have tons if vibraslap. 

Orin Jones
Two musicians who should mate to produce musical perfection are Ana Vidovic and I.  From her site’s biography: “Ana Vidovic comes from the small town of Karlovac near Zagreb, Croatia, and started playing guitar at the age of 5, and by 7 had given her first public performance…Ana’s reputation in Europe led to an invitation to study with Manuel Barrueco at the Peabody Conservatory where she graduated in 2005…[Since,] Ms. Vidovic has given over one thousand public performances…[and] has won an impressive number of prizes and international competitions.” Not only is Ms. Vidovic one of the greatest living classical guitarists, but she is also really, really hot.  I have played guitar for a few years and don’t want kids.  If we were to produce a child, it’d be average looking, and of average intelligence and musical prowess.  However, together, between her touring and financing my new life of luxury/laziness, many times each day, Ana and I would create music to make doves cry.

Angela
Ok, not for nothing, but watching Davey Havok of AFI run on stage and take over lyrics on Green Day’s “Holden Caulfield” was a pretty fucking sweet musical moment I got to witness as a fan.  Otherwise, this question is really hard for me to answer.  Honestly, I think Daniel Johns of Silverchair in all his underestimated and overlooked talent would be a fantastic pairing with someone like the Dresden Dolls.  I like the wild mash-up concept of the artistic meeting the punk and cabaret.  I’ll probably think of something awesome later and smack myself in the forehead.

Klone
If the Gods of Rock were good and just, I’d love to see the musical offspring from the combining of the original line-up of Alice in Chains and early Stone Temple Pilots.  A mainstay of the Seattle sound combined with the Led Zepplin-esque repertoire of STP would serve to redefine Rock in terms that just might transcend the poppy no-man’s land that music has become.
 

Which Song Has The Most Powerful Message? June 14, 2011

Filed under: Music Questions — NVMP @ 11:43 PM

Choosing just one song to award the title of most powerful message is no easy task.  Millions of songs have been written with overt and cryptic messages intended to convey emotion to a particular audience.  On top of that, anyone can find personal meaning behind the lyrics of a song.

So, what song has the most powerful message?

TNT
“Give Peace A Chance” by John Lennon.  That is pretty much the song; powerful and to the point.  There are a ton of songs I could have chosen, but in the end I belted out ‘All we are saying, is give peace a chance.”  This was Lennon’s first hit away from The Beatles and was credited to The Plastic Ono Band.  Another powerful messages from this song: you don’t need to leave bed to make a hit song, literally. 

Hoverbee
John Lennon’s “Imagine” is the song with the most powerful message.  It’s a song about breaking down the barriers that exist among people, which keep us from coming together to work for a common goal.  Lyrically, it tackles religion, politics, war, poverty and world peace.  Musically, it is both beautiful and sad.  It is a song that moves people to deep emotion and feeling.  It also stands the test of time by being relevant in any era. 

Orin Jones
I’m going to go with Samuel Barber’s “Adagio for Strings, Op. 11,” written in 1936 and first performed in ‘38.  Whatever it meant to people back then, since Oliver Stone’s homage to America’s Vietnam war, Platoon, in ’86, it’s represented the suckiness of war and unnecessary death.  There’s a Charlie Sheen PTSD joke in here somewhere. 

Daniel-Edwards
The most powerful song I can think of right now is “Born This Way” by Lady GaGa.  Love her or hate her, “Born This Way” is simply about loving the life you’re living regardless of what labels people apply to you.  Love who you love, be who you are.  It’s a simple message, and it’s an awesome, high energy song.

Angela
I’m particularly fond of John Lennon’s “Working Class Hero.”  The lyrics appeal to me and it doesn’t hurt that Green Day covered it.  Being a twenty something American kid who happened to hit maturity right as we went to war and recession, when the video came out, despite it being for Darfur, it rang out in my brain and stuck close to home.  There are tons of songs that bear powerful messages for myself and society at large, (“Ohio” by Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young is a good one too) but “Working Class Hero” has a bit of a defining quality for me.

Klone
In a bit of an effort to be bold, I’m going to go with “Prison Sex” by TOOL.  “Do onto others, what has been done to you.  Do unto me now, what has been done.  You’re breathing so I guess you’re still alive, even though signs seem to tell me otherwise.”  There’s a lot to think about there, the psychology of abuse and perpetuating a cycle of continued abuse.  On top of that, the song actually rocks so hard, that most people often miss the lyrics or any discernible meaning behind them entirely.

 

Do you feel that fashion should play such a large role in musical genres? May 25, 2011

Filed under: Music Questions — NVMP @ 7:06 PM
Do you feel that fashion should play such a large role in musical genres?  For example, the looks shown on yourscenesucks.com

TNT
No, never.  Music is not fashion.  I think fashion plays too big of a role in music today.  I dress how I want to dress and I listen to anything I want.  How exhausting would it be if I had to change my ensemble every time I changed a CD or put my iPod on shuffle?  If I was a fan of Insane Clown Possie (key word “if”) I would not dress as a Juggalo to show my pride for the group.  Besides, that is someone elses fashion expectation for a fan of a particular musical genre.  There are many ‘scenes’ that music fans could choose to fit in to today, but there is no rule that states you have to dress the part.  Yourscenesucks.com is a fun way of pinpointing the folks that feel differently about this question.  If you are not in high school, it’s childish to think you need to dress a certain way to show your musical tastes.

Hoverbee
I feel that fashion should not play such a large role in musical genres.  I can’t really say to what degree scenes start because music lovers wish to emulate their musical idols or fans set the standard of dress that becomes associated with certain bands.  Although at one time in my life I wore flannels, ripped jeans and converse to emulate my grunge idols, in retrospect it seems silly to me.  Perhaps it had something to do with the search for an identity or individualism.  What’s ironic is that instead of individualism, scenes create a herd mentality.  All of a sudden there are droves of people running around all wearing the same fashions that act as signal to others that they like a certain band or bands.  I suppose it’s a visual, non-verbal way to let others know what music you’re into.  Still, I simply don’t like the idea that if you like a certain genre of music, there’s a look to accompany it.  All of these “looks” or fashions get in the way of what is most important: the music.
Mark
Absolutely not.  While it is completely unavoidable for every style of music and its corresponding scene to develop its own look and mannerisms…it definitely has no place within the genres.  To me, the more effort that a band puts into it fashion sense, the more of a distraction that the so-called artist is trying to create to take the public’s attention off of their obviously sub-par, cookie cutter, shitty music.  For a perfect example, look at Lady Gaga.  Her wardrobe and show set pieces get more attention than her music.  And for those artists that actually have talent, it completely takes away from the music that the artist is trying to create in the first place.  Realistically, music is about SOUND, not looks.  Groups like Duran Duran have always been extremely fashion conscientious and stylish, but even so, it admittedly does become distracting; constantly having their visual images shoved down your throat when it’s the music that is supposed to matter.  I love the New Wave genre, which had one of the most distinctive fashion styles within the realm of music, and yet it would be just as amazing without the visual aids.
Orin Jones
I may be the wrong person to answer this because I don’t dress the part…or at least, I don’t stack neatly into any of the scenester caricatures (praise Allah!).  I’ve got some tats and avoid shaving at all costs, but shucks, I contend I was doing it before the hipsters.  Yeah, I don’t particularly care.  If you wanna dress up like a clown, who am I to judge?  Who knows—could be fun.  And then you move out of your mom’s garage, begin your career as a “Sandwich Artist,” and finally start making it to those group sessions.
Stigz
After a colleague of mine turned me onto yourscenesucks.com, I truly realized how we as a social collective actually dress to “rep” our scene.  However, and I partially (and almost entirely) blame my generation, the 80’s babies, for taking this notion and running with it.  Since we were the ones to first denote labels like skaters, punks, goths, wiggers, etc., as we dressed in collusion with the music we listened to, as if listening to it wasn’t good enough.  As if blasting the stereo and driving around windows down with the volume pinned wasn’t enough, we had to wear the skater jeans, or the tight chick pants (PS if you have balls and you wear tight jeans, you should be beaten with a sock full of batteries-you’re not cool, you’re two ovaries shy of being a woman) to show everyone what scene we were into.  Gladly as we all grew up, most of us grew out of it, and dressed how we wanted to.  I hope, or at least I think, that we realized that it’s about the music not the fashion, and that’s the way it should be.  Music should be about the music, not about the image and the clothes you wear.
Klone
As much as we wish it wasn’t, the simple fact is that in 1979, with a little help from MTV, Buggles basically hit the nail on the head when they said, “Video killed the radio star.”  No longer was music a faceless art-form, the visual void filled only by album liners and theater playbills.  As soon as the music biz went visual, all bets were off.  Not only did the artists’ looks come heavily into play, as far as sell-ability was concerned, but the icon of the “rock star” was created.  You not only had to have the pipes but the packaging as well, from the fashion to the personality and flair.  That’s not to say that certain famous people like Meatloaf and Joe Cocker, as well as other famously fugly mugs like Mick Jagger and Keith Richards didn’t bring their own flavor to the looks department.  Looks alone didn’t define the artist though…one only needs to look at current fugly demi-Goddess Lady GaGa to see that.  (That’s right, I said it, the bitch is HIDEOUS.)  The balance that seems to come into question though is when does the spectacle of the fashion and beauty begin to overshadow or completely overtake the credibility of the artist as a musician?  You could argue that The Go-Gos or The Bangles weren’t amazing musicians, but that they were groups of hot chicks certainly didn’t hurt their claims to fame.  I think it’s when you get into “Juggalo” territory and the likes of Ke$ha that you start to run into the widely spouted “WTF?!” moments.  Do I feel this is how it SHOULD be?  No.  Unfortunately, this is how it is.
Daniel-Edward
I think fashion and music can have a really beautiful and interesting symbiosis when they’re playing off of and inspiring each other, but when fashion becomes a prerequisite to feel like part of a music scene, I think it can be off-putting and overshadow the actual music.  In some cases I think stigma attached to a scene’s fashion can turn someone off to the genre altogether.