|
View previous topic :: View next topic
|
|
| Author |
Message |
RockyRaccoon
Is it solipsistic in here or is it just me?
Gender: Male
Age: 34
Location: Maryland 
Moderator
|
|
|
- #5302
- Posted: 05/11/2014 20:21
- Post subject:
|
| Mercury wrote: | Feeling a slight music interest lull. Except for a few distinct artists I just feel sorta meh about going out and hearing an exploring and enjoying music. The artists that still hold all my attention are Tim Hecker and Glenn branca. Everything else I'm listening to with some joy and curiosity and admiration but with always this nagging idea that this whole music thing is pointless unless in hearing Hecker or Branca. It's weird.
These phases happen. Sometimes I just lose all interest in music bar none. It only lasts a few days then I inevitably discover some artist, group of artists or a genre or 2 that expand my interest and enthusiasm again.
Right now I'm listening to Nina Simone and its really great, but idk. I'm just kinda separate and uninterested. I need go get busy with stuff and come back to music when I finish actually, you know, DOING something. Maybe that will help. |
Dude, just listen to fucking insane amounts of Tim Hecker and Glenn Branca. You don't always have to explore.  Sometimes I go days without listening to any music, or I go weeks listening to nothing but things I already love...I only explore sometimes. Don't explore too much, you'll get bored of your adventures. You don't have to be a LethalNezzle or DBZ who listens to fucking insane amounts of music from a variety of genres at all times to be a good music listener (whatever that means)...just listen and love and sometimes explore.  And take days off if you want, I do that plenty. XD I'm not listening to music right now...the horror!
|
|
|
|
- #5303
- Posted: 05/11/2014 20:22
- Post subject:
|
|
I could top the lethal and DBZ in music listening if I wanted. Just post a list and you'll get some words and soup.
|
|
|
|
- #5304
- Posted: 05/12/2014 01:24
- Post subject:
|
| Antonio-Pedro wrote: |
We were discussing why some Bands in the 2000s have their debut as their most famous (sometimes the best) album
And then I thought to asking you
Why? |
| Mercury wrote: | That is literally the case with every era of rock music. I don't see that as a modern or 2000s trait or distinctive factor.
The Doors, Are You Experienced, VU and Nico, Marquee Moon, Horses, Ramones, Murmur, Surfer Rosa, Ten, Grace, Weezer, Slanted and Enchanted, etc. |
This topic fascinated me enough that I decided to test it. I looked at the 100 most acclaimed artists from each decade on Acclaimed Music and checked to see how many of them had their debut as their most acclaimed album. Here are the results:
1960s: 20%
1970s: 20%
1980s: 33%
1990s: 33%
2000s: 30%
In modern times, an artist can expect their debut to be their most acclaimed album about 1/3 of the time. That number has changed very little since the 1970s and even fell a little in the 2000s.
Why was it different in the '60s and '70s? Dunno. The change was too early for the internet to be responsible. It may have to do with patterns in the recording industry and their willingness to invest in artist development. I remember reading somewhere that they used to spend more money on developing existing artists and less on finding new ones, but I don't know when that change took place.
|
|
|
|
meccalecca
Voice of Reason
Gender: Male
Location: The Land of Enchantment
- #5305
- Posted: 05/12/2014 12:50
- Post subject:
|
| sp4cetiger wrote: | | I remember reading somewhere that they used to spend more money on developing existing artists and less on finding new ones, but I don't know when that change took place. |
This is pretty much on target. Also, the latest generations have no attention span, so they get sick of something much faster. Everyone flocks to a band with a fresh sound, but then with each album the sound becomes less fresh so unless that band has a good songwriter or more depth, they'll get old really fast. The music journalists also got into a mentality that they have to discover an artist. So they also lose interest after the artist goes from obscurity to stardom.
_________________
http://jonnyleather.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
- #5306
- Posted: 05/12/2014 20:16
- Post subject:
|
| meccalecca wrote: | | Also, the latest generations have no attention span, so they get sick of something much faster. |
I've heard this a lot from older generations, but have always wondered if there was some way to test it directly from historical data. Don't know what one could use, though...
|
|
|
|
Necharsian
Best Ever User
Gender: Male
- #5307
- Posted: 05/12/2014 21:21
- Post subject:
|
I bet it has more to do with which album a person hears first. As in Id assume there's a larger % of albums that the user first got familiarized with a particular artist on someone's overall chart than specific débuts. As in, people's first album listened to by Radiohead would probably be Ok Computer not Pablo Honey.
So when people hear Funeral as their first AF album, they love it and it becomes difficult for another of theirs to beat. This isn't because Funeral was their debut and they went downhill after, but rather because people are more likely to grab onto their first love and even if they really like Neon Bible too it's unlikely going to live up to the impossibly high standards that they've internally set for Funeral. This is probably pretty obvious in that the more critically acclaimed = more people will love it, but Id guess for albums that are closer in terms of acclaim, the one that a certain person hears first is the one they'd like more on average.
This is just word spit at this point and isn't exactly what is being talked about here anyway, but it's interesting to me and I'm guessing that my overall chart would have a higher number of albums that first got me into a band than debuts.
|
|
|
|
Karnoffel
Gender: Male
Age: 29
Location: California
- #5308
- Posted: 05/12/2014 21:21
- Post subject:
|
|
Kid A beating The White Album again. Funeral is really close to doing the same!
|
|
|
|
- #5309
- Posted: 05/13/2014 12:49
- Post subject:
|
|
Looking for an album I can't remember the name of, but remember the album cover of. I can't remember the band either (and I really shouldn't forget them as they're fairly big in regards to their genre). I believe it's a compilation as well and the members were also pretty involved with other projects as well. The cover is very colorful and contains two people sitting down. One female, one male. I believe the male is taller and is fairly slim. He has long hair. I also think the album has flowers in it. They're sitting in the grass and possibly having a picnic. The album was released somewhere between the late 80's and late 90's (most likely in a year ending in an 8. It's most likely late 90's btw).
|
|
|
|
meccalecca
Voice of Reason
Gender: Male
Location: The Land of Enchantment
- #5310
- Posted: 05/13/2014 14:00
- Post subject:
|
| Necharsian wrote: | | I bet it has more to do with which album a person hears first. |
This is a pretty great theory which I think does hold true in many cases. There's usually a deeper connection to albums that introduce you to a band. In my case with Radiohead, Pablo Honey was first, but Radiohead also just got much better over time. Some bands don't change that much, so if they release 3 very similar albums, I would expect that whatever they hear first to be their favorite
| sp4cetiger wrote: | | I've heard this a lot from older generations, but have always wondered if there was some way to test it directly from historical data. Don't know what one could use, though... |
I doubt there's a easy way to measure this. I'm sure the cases of ADD are skyrocketing, but that's just due to the crazy overmedication in the present. But it's hard to imagine that attention spans aren't shorter. TV, commercials, video games are all geared towards much shorter attention spans now than when we were kids. I remember reading something years ago that Sesame Street actually may have been the TV show that originally cut out attention spans. But the educational benefits were really great.
I believe it's an adaptational measure. Kids today are expected to consume far more information at all times than we were. It's coming from every direction. I don't know if it's good or bad. I think it's just different.
_________________
http://jonnyleather.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
  |
All times are GMT
|
| Page 531 of 982 |
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
