Post subject: Imitation is The Sincerest Form of Flattery
So, I came across this band last week, and was not initially that impressed by them. However, after a couple more listens to their album, I'm really digging it.
I just posted this in my diary, but I wanted a larger discussion going on.
Whether it's intentional or not, this guy sounds like he just came straight out of the middle to late 80's, most notably sounding like Mark Hollis. Is this going to help or hurt this band's career?
That Greta Van Fleet band (which I'm not fond of) has the singer that uncannily sounds like Robert Plant, and it completely turns me off. I'm not finding the same feelings for this group, which seems pretty hypocritical on my part.
What does it take for a band to shirk this kind of stigma?
Somebody recommended me this album (may have been you chief?), and at first I was like oh great, another Black Keys/White Stripes/Strokes type band, but what "shook the stigma" for me is he actually accomplished the original tones and musical elements at times better than the originals. He also was very diverse on his rip offs. haha. It wasn't I figured out to do this one sound really well, rather, yeah - I can do nearly any vintage sound really well. From Motown to old rock n' roll to old garage rock to near psychedelic rock, soft rock etc. He does really well in all those things and imo carved out a piece of originality in that realm.
It's when they can only do one imitated thing that irks me. When it's an entire album of an alternate universe of a single song by Led Zeppelin or something... well there's probably a crap 60s band that did that already and already got forgotten for it too. What makes Led Zeppelin unique is they do have varying levels of creativity. Sure they might have a signature sound, but Going to California isn't part of that signature sound, yet it's my favorite song of theirs.
idk that's my two cents on the stigma, and use case and stuff.
Post subject: Re: Imitation is The Sincerest Form of Flattery
Tha1ChiefRocka wrote:
That Greta Van Fleet band (which I'm not fond of) has the singer that uncannily sounds like Robert Plant, and it completely turns me off. I'm not finding the same feelings for this group, which seems pretty hypocritical on my part.
What does it take for a band to shirk this kind of stigma?
Greta van Fleet is imo not inspired by Led Zeppelin, they're blatantly ripping them off. Not like Led Zeppelin taking parts of Muddy Waters' lyrics, or the Lana Del Ray vs Radiohead vs The Hollies thing, that's just a part of the specific song. Greta Van Fleet try to ACT like Led Zeppelin (the way the singer moves his hands, exactly like Plant on The Song Remains The Same during Stairway...) Also his singing technique is so similar to Plant's, then their guitar tone... I mean it's good music but they are freaking identity stealers if you ask me...
I'd be very happy if they stopped being Led Zeppelin and just started playing some good ol' blues rock, which they surely can play well. No need to be completely unique, just like there's no need to be some other band. _________________ Overall chart Fake overall chart
It's funny we bring up Led Zeppelin. It was more common back then to play "the standards". Beatles were a cover band - and Led Zeppelin did the same. Sure they had a style, but they too "ripped" off the works of earlier artists.
I'm just stating a fact that these great bands we all love for their creativity were often playing covers in the beginning. Sure they made it their own version, etc.
So in other words, is it fair to say these artists are any less... so long as they go on and do great things of their own?
I feel the White Stripes is a great example of taking something that was already a thing and expounding upon it and making something pretty good on their (his) own.
Wolfmother on the other hand - meh. Started out interesting and just lost any steam because they indeed were just regurgitating something already done. No additional energy or whatever.
Well bringing back the 80's is working pretty well for Bruno Mars. _________________ Nothing really matters, anyone can see, nothing really matters, nothing really matters to me.
Bruno mars is actually a little bit different. At least that's how I feel but you're welcome to your own opinion of course . I actually think if you directly copy you will inevitably screw up and no one will like it because of course the music is made under different circumstances. As for Greta van Fleet there is no way a modern boy band can play like the incredibly talented performers in Led Zeppelin. Kids are different, more spoiled, nowadays, which ties in to what I'm saying about the different circumstances.
As for Greta van Fleet there is no way a modern boy band can play like the incredibly talented performers in Led Zeppelin. Kids are different, more spoiled, nowadays, which ties in to what I'm saying about the different circumstances.
It's funny we bring up Led Zeppelin. It was more common back then to play "the standards". Beatles were a cover band - and Led Zeppelin did the same. Sure they had a style, but they too "ripped" off the works of earlier artists.
I'm just stating a fact that these great bands we all love for their creativity were often playing covers in the beginning. Sure they made it their own version, etc.
So in other words, is it fair to say these artists are any less... so long as they go on and do great things of their own?
I feel the White Stripes is a great example of taking something that was already a thing and expounding upon it and making something pretty good on their (his) own.
Wolfmother on the other hand - meh. Started out interesting and just lost any steam because they indeed were just regurgitating something already done. No additional energy or whatever.
Playing covers and imitating another artist's sound are two different issues that often overlap a great deal, but can be distinct. Some covers greatly reinterpret, sometimes ironically, the original, like Devo's version of "Satisfaction" or The Talking Heads' "Take Me to The River."
When artists play a cover, they're giving the original songwriter the credit, so if their sound is based on that artist, they're at least acknowledging it somewhat. Zeppelin obviously was completely wrong when they reinterpreted songs and didn't at the very least share credit. The Beatles and Stones did a lot of covers early in their careers, but at least they gave the credit (unfortunate that the Stones made a lot more money from their records than the covered blues artists from theirs) and grew into bands with their own sound and original songwriting.
Every musician learns by copying others when they're starting out (though a majority don't put it on record). But as
sethmadsen said, if you don't grow into your own sound, that's lame (though there are those that still make enjoyable music) and possibly plagiarism, even if it can't be legally proved.
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
. I actually think if you directly copy you will inevitably screw up and no one will like it because of course the music is made under different circumstances. As for Greta van Fleet there is no way a modern boy band can play like the incredibly talented performers in Led Zeppelin. Kids are different, more spoiled, nowadays, which ties in to what I'm saying about the different circumstances.
